Appeal No. 96-1301
Application 08/175,078
The Rejections on Appeal
Claim 22 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly
point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which
applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-15, 17-19, 21 and 22 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 102(a) or 102(b) as being anticipated by each of
Hawsey and Takahashi.
The appellants further argue against the examiner’s
objection to an amendment dated August 11, 1994, as containing
new matter. However, no claim has been rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as lacking written description
support in the specification as filed. Accordingly, the
examiner’s objection to the amendment is not a proper issue in
this appeal but a matter addressable by petition to the
Commissioner.
The Invention
The invention is directed to a rotor for use in an
electric machine. The rotor comprises a central sheet, which
has two faces. Located on each face are one or more permanent
magnets. The permanent magnets are oriented such that a
magnet located on one face is magnetized in the same direction
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007