Appeal No. 2006-0848
Application No. 09/981,231
establish a prima facie case of obviousness. Appellant reiterates that the modification
proposed by the examiner would render the wind powered generator of Salter useless.
Appellant also asserts that the examiner has failed to demonstrate that the facts in this
case are similar to the facts in Jakipse. Finally, appellant argues that Salter does not
disclose anything that rotates within the lever arm 33 or the support arm 36 so that any
combination of Salter and Abe would not include this feature [reply brief, pages 8-10].
We will sustain the examiner’s rejection of claims 39 and 43 as unpatentable over
Salter and Abe. The (electric) generator of Salter is the drum 15 and its associated
elements which produce electric power when the drum is sufficiently rotated. As can be
seen in figure 1 of Salter, the drum 15 simply has to be in contact with each of the rims
13. We agree with the examiner that the electric power producing elements associated
with the drum can be located upwind or downwind of the rotating spars and such
location would have no effect on the functioning of the
airfoils 19. In other words, the entire assembly of figure 1 is not turned around, but only
the generator 15 would be moved to the other side of the rotating rotors 12. Thus,
appellant’s argument that the airfoils would become useless is not agreed with.
Although we agree with appellant that the examiner’s reason for moving the generator
in Salter is not supported within the references, we agree, nevertheless, that the artisan
15
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007