Appeal No. 2005-0233
Application 10/085,138
and Tran. The examiner also responds that the motivation to
combine the Tran delay circuit with the Holmquest supervisory
circuit is to prevent false shut downs as taught by Tran
[answer, pages 10-16].
Appellant responds that Holmquest does not delay the
output of the sensing circuits as in the claimed invention.
Specifically, appellant asserts that the sensing circuits are not
being delayed, but instead, the closing of the relay is being
delayed. Appellant responds that the claimed activation circuit
requires signals from both the sensing and delay circuits which
is argued not to be taught by Tran. Appellant argues that
Holmquest and Tran cannot be combined because Holmquest is used
in a high voltage setting whereas Tran is used in a low voltage
environment [reply brief, pages 3-7].
We will sustain the examiner’s rejection of
representative claim 1. We agree with the examiner that
Holmquest teaches a delay circuit which performs in the same
manner as the disclosed invention. Although claim 1 recites that
the delay circuit delays initial operation of said sensing
circuits for a predetermined period of time, that is not the
function of the delay circuit as described in the specification.
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007