Appeal No. 96-0423
Application 08/126,439
oscillation means imparting an automatic periodic oscillation
to the hour angle and declination of the antenna as claimed.
The examiner’s basic position in this rejection under 35
U.S.C. § 103, as amplified and embellished upon by our
reasoning as set forth earlier, simply would not have led the
artisan to the identical disclosed structure nor to the
structural equivalent thereto in the manner claimed within the
sixth paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112. Therefore, the decision
of the examiner rejecting all the pending claims on appeal
under
35 U.S.C. § 103 must be reversed.2
In view of the foregoing, the decisions of the examiner
rejecting various claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and all claims
on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are reversed.
REVERSED
The claimed "apparatus" of claim 3 does not "comprise" a single means, that is,2
an oscillation means only since the body of the claim recites this means and the antenna
initially set forth in the preamble.
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007