Appeal No. 2006-2920 Page 14
Application No. 10/813,501
Therefore, we agree with appellants that at the instant when
transistors 10 and 841 are disabled (i.e., occurring in time slightly before the
field coil backflow current is fully discharged to ground), the backflow
current through transistors 10 and 841 is still negative [see brief, page 5,
¶2]. We further agree with appellants that the only way to re-enable
transistors 10 and 841 is by field coil 32 voltage Vx again going negative (in
response to generation control signal Vc disabling (i.e., turning OFF)
transistor 9 [see brief, page 5, ¶3]. Thus, we agree with appellants’
conclusion that Asada discloses initially enabling (i.e., after transistor 9 turns
OFF) and then disabling (after the field coil discharges) transistors 10 and
841 in response to two different values of a negative current [see brief, page
7].
Accordingly, we will reverse the examiner’s anticipation rejection of
representative claim 1 for essentially the same reasons argued by appellants
in the briefs. Because dependent claims 2-7 contain the same limitations as
independent claim 1, we will also reverse the examiner’s anticipation
rejection of these claims.
II. We consider next the examiner’s rejection of claims 8-11 as being
anticipated by Asada. Since Appellants’ arguments with respect to this
rejection have treated these claims as a single group which stand or fall
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007