Ex parte DVORSKY et al. - Page 3




          Appeal No. 95-4871                                                          
          Application No. 08/172,666                                                  


               bonding wire leads to electrodes of a ceramic                          
          actuator/sensor; and                                                        
               encapsulating the ceramic actuator/sensor in a non-                    
          conductive fiber composite material having a coefficient of                 
          thermal expansion (CTE) between the CTE of the ceramic                      
          material and the CTE of a selected graphite-epoxy laminate                  
          structure;                                                                  
               whereby the encapsulating material provides good                       
          mechanical coupling, reduces thermally induced stresses,                    
          electrically insulates the actuator sensor, and protects it                 
          from mechanical damage.                                                     
               The references relied on by the examiner are:                          
          Wingrove                      3,594,514           July 20,                  
          1971                                                                        
          Evans                         3,711,617           Jan. 16,                  
          1973                                                                        
          Whatmore et al. (Whatmore)    4,876,776           Oct. 31,                  
          1989                                                                        
               Claims 8, 12, 13 and 23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §               
          103 as being unpatentable over Whatmore in view of Wingrove.                
               Claims 8 through 11 and 23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.              
          § 103 as being unpatentable over Evans in view of Wingrove.                 
               Reference is made to the brief and the answer for the                  
          respective positions of the appellants and the examiner.                    
                                       OPINION                                        
               We have carefully considered the entire record before us,              
          and we will reverse the obviousness rejections.                             

                                          3                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007