Ex Parte LEE et al - Page 2




          Appeal No. 2001-0740                                                        
          Application 09/054,415                                                      

                                     BACKGROUND                                       
               The disclosed invention relates to an amplifier which                  
          utilizes switching of a variable power source to provide                    
          different levels of power to the amplifier during different                 
          portions of an operational cycle, such as providing high power              
          during an expected slewing phase when an amplifier's output                 
          changes at its maximum rate and a reduced power during less                 
          demanding phases, such as during settling or holding.  By                   
          increasing maximum output current during the period when slew is            
          likely to occur, the current in the amplifier during settling can           
          be decreased, which results in a net power savings (spec. at 7).            
               Claim 1 is reproduced below.                                           
                    1.  An amplifier circuit comprising a power control               
               circuit configured to provide relatively high power to an              
               active element during at least one portion of an amplifier's           
               operational cycle and to provide relatively low power                  
               otherwise.                                                             
               The examiner relies on the following references:                       
          Mizuide                  4,806,791     February 21, 1989                    
          Wang et al. (Wang)       5,691,720     November 25, 1997                    

               Claims 15 and 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first           
          paragraph, as based on a lack of enabling disclosure.                       
               Claims 1-8, 11, 15, 17, and 18 stand rejected under                    
          35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for                  
          failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the                  
          subject matter which appellants regard as their invention.                  

                                        - 2 -                                         





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007