Appeal No. 2005-0364
Application No. 10/072,676
connected to an input (at 140a) of the input sampler, with the
second terminal (bottom terminal) of the first secondary winding
of the isolation transformer (34) also constituting the output
(VOUT) of the power line conditioner. The examiner also points
out that Estes expressly shows the “first port” (the port at the
primary) and the “second port” (the port at the secondary). (See
pages 4-5 of the answer).
While appellant argues certain perceived differences
regarding structure between Estes and the instant claimed
invention, we find the most telling argument to pertain to the
claim preamble. Independent claim 1, and therefore, dependent
claim 2, recites, in the preamble, a “series active power line
conditioner.” The preamble of a claim will not limit the scope
of a claim when it simply states a purpose or intended use of the
invention. Loctite Corp. v. Ultraseal Ltd., 781 F.2d 861, 868,
228 USPQ 90, 94 (Fed. Cir. 1985). The recitation of a “power
line conditioner” in the instant claims is more than a mere
intended use of the invention because the preamble clearly
provides an antecedent basis for certain terms in the body of the
claim (note the recitation of “said power line conditioner” on
the third line of the paragraph reciting the feedback control
loop and at the end of the claim). The power line conditioner of
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007