Appeal No. 95-3888
Application No. 08/l05,244
With regard to the examiner’s complaint that driver
circuits are known to have an input and an output and that the
drivers 20a-20c are not shown with such inputs and outputs in
the drawing, we cannot agree. Figure 1, for example, clearly
shows inputs on lines 22a-22c to, respectively, drivers 20a-
20c while the outputs are joined to electrical line 11 on
which line the output from the appropriately selected driver
is produced.
We now turn to the rejection of claims 1 through 3 under
35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph. We also will not sustain
this rejection.
In claim 1, the examiner does not understand how an
“electronic apparatus” can comprise a “mechanical mechanism.”
There are many electronic machines that have mechanical
components therein such as typewriters, refrigerators, washers
and dryers, toasters and microwave ovens, sewing machines,
etc. Therefore, it is inconceivable that the examiner would
question how an electronic apparatus could comprise a
mechanical mechanism. Moreover, the claim’s recitation of
“comprising” leaves the claim open-ended. Therefore, the
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007