Appeal No. 2003-1155 Page 4
Application No. 08/821,995
applied and requires only routine skill in the art. The examiner further concluded that it
would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
was made to provide a DC electrical motor operable with a maximum drive voltage of
from about 12 to about 24 volts, since it has been held that discovering an optimum
value of a result effective variable (in this case, the optimum voltage for the DC motor)
involves only routine skill in the art.
In response to this rejection, the appellants filed a declaration from David L. Krell,
dated March 18, 2002, and traversed the examiner's reliance on "known in the art" and
requested, in accordance with MPEP 2144.03, the examiner cite and apply a prior art
reference (see Paper No. 19, filed March 18, 2002 and Paper No. 21, filed September
9, 2002).
OPINION
Claims 4 and 11
In reaching our decision in this appeal with respect to claims 4 and 11, we have
given careful consideration to the appellants' specification and claims, to the applied
prior art references, and to the respective positions articulated by the appellants in their
brief (Paper No. 24, filed September 9, 2002) and the examiner in the answer (Paper
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007