Appeal No. 20005-1269
Application No.09/499,060
R can be set to any value, reasons the examiner, then the combination of applied
references is capable of providing the claimed function.
Even if the resistor R in Tanigawa is capable of being set to some value that
would result in the claimed invention, the question is what would have led the artisan to
choose the specific value of R, to enable the charging current to be proportional to a
square of a ratio of the second resistance and the first resistance. Without appellants’
suggestion to make the charging current proportional to a square of a ratio of the
second resistance and the first resistance, the artisan would appear to have had no
reason to modify the references in order to reach this claimed result.
Thus, assuming, arguendo, that the examiner’s rationale was reasonable anent
the rest of the claimed subject matter, the rationale is just not convincing as to the
combination of applied references suggesting the claimed requirement of the charging
current being proportional to a square of a ratio of the second resistance and the first
resistance.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007