Appeal No. 2001-0740
Application 09/054,415
Mizuide in a switched capacitor input circuit. The rejection of
claim 14 is reversed.
35 U.S.C. § 102(e) over Wang
The examiner states that the claims have been given their
broadest reasonable interpretation and that when claims are
broadly written, confusing, or misleading, they can be
interpreted in ways different than what the appellants intended
(EA13).
Appellants argue that Wang teaches that the user may select
a resolution and that the resolution selected may require
different levels of bias current depending on the selection, but
once a particular resolution is selected, that resolution remains
in effect so that the power allocation remains fixed until a
different resolution is selected (Br13). This is the only reason
given by appellants in support of the otherwise bare assertions
that various limitations of claims 1 and 10-18 are not shown
(additional arguments are provided for claim 9).
We note that appellants do not contest that Wang implicitly
teaches the user selecting different resolutions at different
times during operation.
Claims 1-4
- 19 -
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007