Appeal 2007-1052
Application 10/329,906
an energy source that supplies power to a utility grid when the DC link
voltage connected to these power sources falls below a threshold. (Findings
of Fact 11 through 13.) Additionally, as noted above, Appellants’ own
Specification admits that combining power from a plurality of sources to
inject an AC current back into the mains voltage is a conventional practice in
the art. In light of these findings, it is our view that one of ordinary skill in
the art would have found it obvious to combine the teachings of Fang and
Emmerich to yield the invention as claimed. Therefore, it follows that the
Examiner did not err in rejecting claims 1 through 33, and 34 as being
unpatentable over Fang and Emmerich taken in various combinations with
Ashley and Lansberry.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
On the record before us, Appellants have not shown that the Examiner
has failed to establish that Lansberry anticipates claims 1, 5 through 8, 11,
13, 15 through 20, 24 through 31, 33, and 34 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a).
Further, Appellants have not shown that the Examiner failed to establish that
Lansberry renders claims 2 through 4, 9, 10, 12, 14, and 21 through 23
unpatentable. Additionally, Appellants have not shown that the Examiner
failed to establish that the combination of Fang and Emmerich, taken in
combination with Ashley and Lansberry, renders claims 1 through 31, 33,
and 34 unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
DECISION
We have affirmed the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1 through
31, 33, and 34.
13
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013