Appeal No. 1997-0316
Application No. 08/218,951
Reference is made to the brief and answer for the
respective positions of appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
We reverse.
Each rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is based on a
combination of Shiozaki and another reference. Both appellant
and the examiner agree that while the instant claimed
invention is directed to a “top shooter” printhead, i.e.,
where ink is ejected in a direction perpendicular to the plane
of the heater resistor, as is Taniguchi and Scheu, the primary
reference to
Shiozaki is directed to a “side shooter” printhead, i.e.,
where ink is ejected in a direction parallel to the plane of
the heater resistor.
Accordingly, the examiner is combining different types of
printhead technologies (the “side shooter” of Shiozaki with
the “top shooters” of Taniguchi and Scheu) in order to arrive
at the instant claimed invention. While the instant claims do
not recite a “top shooter” printhead specifically, it is clear
that this is the type of technology to which the instant
claims are directed. Independent claims 1 and 12 recite “ink
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007