Appeal No. 2005-0364
Application No. 10/072,676
into a triangle wave output by way of a feedback loop and that
the artisan “would deem it reasonable to consider this to be
power conditioning” (answer-page 8).
We view the examiner’s position as interpreting the claim
language, “series active power line conditioner” in an
unreasonably broad manner. The mere processing, or converting,
of a signal does not, in itself, constitute a “power line
conditioning” function. Appellant has asserted this term to be
well understood by artisans to mean the “removal spectral
impurities from an AC power line so as to provide power that is
substantially sinusoidal and devoid of harmonic, spurious and
random noise components” (reply brief-page 8). To substantiate
this claim, appellant has provided evidence in the form of
technical journals and technical dictionary definitions, attached
to the reply brief as appendices. For example, on the first page
of the submission, entitled “Juice From Cans,” at the bottom of
the third column, it is indicated that power conditioners are “to
ensure...purity” of an AC signal. On the first page of a
publication by S&VC (Chris Steinwand, author), it is indicated
that “in order to be considered a power conditioner in the
generally accepted sense of the term, the unit must incorporate
surge protection, electromagnetic-interference/radio frequency
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007