Ex Parte JACKSON et al - Page 2



          Appeal No. 2004-1981                                       Page 2           
          Application No. 09/404,692                                                  

          the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 1,           
          which is reproduced as follows:                                             
               1. A control method for non-linear coupled systems of                  
          producing units having a single consumer output, the method                 
          comprising the steps of                                                     
               setting each producing unit to have an output responsive to            
          a continuously provided analog signal representative of a market            
          price,                                                                      
               connecting each producing unit to a marketwire carrying the            
          analog signal, with the changes in the analog signal on the                 
          marketwire representing changes in the market price and dependent           
          upon the output response of each producing unit.                            
               The prior art reference of record relied upon by the                   
          examiner in rejecting the appealed claims is:                               
          Clearwater                5,394,324                Feb. 28, 1995            
               Claims 1-10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being           
          anticipated by Clearwater.                                                  
               Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by           
          the examiner and appellants regarding the above-noted rejection,            
          we make reference to the examiner's answer (Paper No. 20, mailed            
          February 6, 2004) for the examiner's complete reasoning in                  
          support of the rejection, and to appellants' brief (Paper No. 19,           
          filed December 22, 2003) for appellants' arguments thereagainst.            
          Only those arguments actually made by appellants have been                  
          considered in this decision.  Arguments which appellants could              






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007