Appeal No. 1997-3158
Application No. 08/490,553
Mino JP 58-222403 Dec. 24, 1983
Yagi JP 61-904 Jan. 06.
1986
Claims 1 through 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
As evidence of obviousness, the examiner cites Yamada and Ju
with regard to claims 1 and 2, adding Mino to the basic
combination with regard to claim 3 and adding Yagi to the
basic combination with regard to claim 4.
Reference is made to the briefs and answer for the
respective positions of appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
We reverse.
Claim 1 specifically calls for the first and second
magnetic yokes to be disposed “without overlapping each other
except at said gap.” The primary reference, Yamada, shows no
more than that admitted to be prior art by appellant, and the
examiner admits that Yamada does not disclose the yokes
overlapping at the gap. The examiner relies on Ju for the
teaching of yokes overlapping at a gap, and the examiner
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007