Appeal No. 2000-0354
Application No. 08/682,471
as claimed, in view of the significant teachings and suggestions
in Webster to modify those already taught in Bajorek,
particularly those noted earlier at column 3, as well as his
substantive teachings as well. The examiner’s reasoning, set
forth at the top of page 3 of the final rejection, of
combinability is to speed the transfer of data and reduce overall
size and cost of production and is supported by the collective
teachings and showings of both references. Moreover, the
advantages set forth at columns 6 and 7 of Webster are highly
desirable to have been imparted to the overall system of Bajorek.
With these considerations in mind, we sustain the rejection
of independent claim 1 on appeal for the reasons set forth by the
examiner as initially argued at page 2 of the final rejection.
To the extent broadly recited, the energy sensing at least
includes the energy monitor 28 and the fuzzy logic energy
comparator 36 in figure 1 of Bajorek with the controlling first
circuit claimed being provided at least by the remote controller
24. Various embodiments of both digital and analog sensing
circuits are depicted in later figures. The combined teachings
of Bajorek and Webster clearly teach the additional feature that
the various sensing and other circuits set forth in the body of
independent claim 1 on appeal are both fabricated on the same
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007