Appeal 2007-0904
Application 11/025,331
current detector (54), an A/D converter (53), and a microprocessor (57), all
working together as a unit to separately and independently power the electric
motors (M1 and M2). (Col. 8, ll. 5-54.)
6. Katagiri teaches a direct current voltage source (DC280 Line)
connected to the biaxial inverter unit. (Col. 6, ll. 14-17, ll. 24-27.)
7. As depicted in Figure 5, Okushima teaches a control device for
powering a hybrid vehicle with two motors/generators (11, 21) and an
inverter set. (Col. 7, ll. 36-41.)
8. Okushima teaches that the inverter set includes first and second
inverters (10, 20) for respectively powering the electric motors (11, 21) and
for respectively controlling inverter control circuits 12 and 22. (Col. 7, ll.
37-44.)
PRINCIPLES OF LAW
1. ANTICIPATION
It is axiomatic that anticipation of a claim under § 102 can be found
only if the prior art reference discloses every element of the claim. See In re
King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1326, 231 USPQ 136, 138 (Fed. Cir. 1986) and
Lindemann Maschinenfabrik GMBH v. American Hoist & Derrick Co., 730
F.2d 1452, 1458, 221 USPQ 481, 485 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102, a single prior art reference
that discloses, either expressly or inherently, each limitation of a claim
invalidates that claim by anticipation. Perricone v. Medicis Pharmaceutical
Corp., 432 F.3d 1368, 1375-76, 77 USPQ2d 1321, 1325-26 (Fed. Cir. 2005),
citing Minn. Mining & Mfg. Co. v. Johnson & Johnson Orthopaedics, Inc.,
reason why one inverter unit includes a plurality of inverters is to simplify
circuitry and to reduce the manufacturing cost. (Col. 8, ll. 9-11.)
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013