Ex Parte Saranditis - Page 10

                   Appeal 2006-2171                                                                                                 
                   Application 10/840,715                                                                                           

                           The Examiner rejected claims 10, 11, 13 and 26 under § 103(a) over                                       
                   Herzhauser in view of Price.  The Examiner found that Herzhauser does not                                        
                   teach “counting the number of times the pump is operated within a                                                
                   predetermined period of time” (claim 10 and 11), “said electronic circuit                                        
                   comprising a counting circuit for determining the number of times said                                           
                   pump is operated during a predetermined period of time” (claim 13) or “said                                      
                   control unit monitors said rate of water accumulation in said holding tank                                       
                   based on the number of times said pump is operated during a predetermined                                        
                   period of time” (claim 26) (Answer 4, 5, 7, 10).  The Examiner found that                                        
                   Price discloses a control device for a bilge pump by “counting the number of                                     
                   times the pump is operated within a predetermined period of time” (Answer                                        
                   5, 7, 10).  Based on Price’s disclosure, the Examiner concluded that it would                                    
                   have been prima facie obvious to use Price’s control system and method that                                      
                   determine the frequency of pump operation to assess the rate of water                                            
                   leakage with Herzhauser’s device and method for controlling water leakage                                        
                   into a boat via a stuffing box “to alert the boat owner when the packing [i.e.,                                  
                   stuffing] box is leaking too much” (Answer 6, 7, 11).                                                            
                           Appellant makes similar arguments regarding claims 10, 11, 13 and                                        
                   26  as were made with respect to claim 1.  We are unpersuaded by those                                           
                   arguments for the same reasons discussed above regarding claim 1.                                                
                           We are also unpersuaded by Appellant’s additional argument                                               
                   regarding claims 10, 11, 13 and 26 that Price does not disclose counting the                                     
                   number of times a pump operates to determine the rate of leakage.  Price                                         
                   discloses that the “on-time of the bilge pump is accumulated over a                                              
                   predetermined period of time and compared with a corresponding reference                                         
                   parameter” (Price, col. 1, l. 68 to col. 2, l. 3).  Moreover, Price provides an                                  

                                                                10                                                                  

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013