Appeal 2006-2564
Application 10/259,743
As shown in Figure 1, system 10 according to this first
preferred embodiment of the present invention also includes
programmable controller 20, by way of which the physical
action of system 10…is controlled. Programmable controller
20 has a signal output that is coupled to a device within system
10 that is capable of controlling and stopping the physical
action. In this example, a signal output from programmable
controller 20 is coupled to motor control valve 8;
programmable controller 20 thus is capable of opening and
closing motor control valve 8, and thus starting and stopping
the physical action of the nitrogen gas bubble within tank 2,
under either user or program control.
Programmable controller 20 may be implemented by way
of any conventional programmable device, system, or
subsystem, by way of which manufacturing equipment and
processes are controlled. For example, programmable
controller 20 may be realized by way of an embedded
microcontroller within system 10, which responds to user
inputs or programmed sequences that are applied directly to
system 10. Alternatively, programmable controller 20 may be
realized within a larger system computer implemented as a
higher-performance workstation, either standalone or within a
network, that controls multiple processes within the wafer
fabrication factory. The particular realization of programmable
controller 20 thus depends upon the desired extent and access
of such control within the overall factory within which system
10 is implemented. [Emphasis added.]
Given this description, we concur with the Examiner that the timer
taught by Calio reads on the claimed programmable controller. In re Morris,
127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027 (Fed. Cir. 1997).2 As
required by the claimed programmable controller defined by the
2 The Examiner has properly given the broadest reasonable interpretation of
the claimed programmable controller consistent with the Specification.
There is nothing in this record which demonstrates that the Examiner’s
interpretation is unreasonable.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013