Ex parte DEUTSCH, et al. - Page 11




          Appeal No. 95-2111                                                          
          Application 07/771,173                                                      

                    a tip for performing root canals and                              
                    apicoectomies...which is illustrated as                           
                    tapered and thus inherently produces an                           
                    annular output [examiner’s answer at page                         
                    6]                                                                
                    In our opinion, the examiner has no reasonable basis              
          for finding that the optical tip in Vassiliades inherently                  
          produces an “annular pattern.”  In contrast to Sinofsky, where              
          the gradually tapered tip 62 is expressly disclosed at col. 6,              
          lines 25-41 as being shaped in a manner which results in light              
          being gradually directed outwardly, no such express disclosure              
          is found in Vassiliadis regarding the direction of light                    
          output.  The examiner has provided no convincing technical                  
          explanation, and none is apparent to us, as to why the                      
          relatively bluntly tapered laser tip 212 of Vassiliadis would               
          inherently divert laser light in an “annular pattern” as                    
          called for by claim 1.  In this regard, and in contrast to the              
          examiner, we do not view Sinofsky as establishing that a                    
          tapered tip will necessarily produce an “annular pattern.”                  
          Accordingly, the examiner’s position regarding the inherent                 
          characteristics of Vassiliadis is not well founded.  It                     
          follows that we cannot sustain the examiner’s anticipation                  
          rejection of claims 1 and 8 based thereon.                                  

                                        -11-                                          





Page:  Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007