Appeal No. 1999-1998
Application 08/793,365
its positive input terminal. The comparator output is in turn
connected to stator exciting coils 13 and 14 of AC motor 11
(column 5, lines 11 through 25).
The examiner is of the opinion (final rejection, page 4)
that the two voltage inputs to the comparator are rpm values.
Appellant argues (reply brief, page 5) that Ishikura discloses
control of a two-phase AC motor, that the inputs to the
comparator 29 are not rpm values, and that the output from the
comparator is not compared to a limit value. We agree with
appellant’s arguments. Accordingly, the 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
rejection of claims 1, 2 and 8 is reversed.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claim 5 is reversed
because the teachings of Iizawa do not cure the noted
shortcomings in the teachings of Fassel.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of dependent claims 9
and 10 is reversed because Fassel fails to disclose the
monitoring arrangement of independent claim 1.
DECISION
All of the rejections of record are reversed. In
summary, the decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007