Ex parte MAHON - Page 3




               Appeal No. 1998-0180                                                                                                 
               Application No. 08/471,309                                                                                           

                       the second coaxial waveguide having a second coupling device connected to its output end, the                
               second coupling device coupling energy between the difference port and electromagnetic energy                        
               propagating within the second coaxial waveguide,                                                                     

                       whereby the first coaxial waveguide provides a sum electromagnetic radiation pattern with                    
               respect to the electromagnetic radiation received from free space and the second coaxial waveguide                   
               provides a difference electromagnetic radiation pattern with respect to the electromagnetic radiation                
               received from free space.                                                                                            

                       The examiner relies on the following references:                                                             

               Low et al. (Low)                       3,665,481                      May 23, 1972                                   
               Liu et al. (Liu)               4,041,499                      Aug.  9, 1977                                          
               Seavey                                 4,740,795                      Apr. 26, 1988                                  

                       Claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as anticipated by Liu.                                         

                       Claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Liu.                                      

                       Claim 3 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Liu and Low.                              

                       Claims 4 and 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Liu, Low, and                       

               Seavey.                                                                                                              

                       We refer to the Final Rejection (Paper No. 17) and the Examiner's Answer (Paper No. 29) for                  
               a statement of the examiner's position and to the Brief  (Paper No. 28) and the Reply Brief (Paper No.1                                                            

               30) for appellant’s position.                                                                                        





                       1We have not considered an initial Brief (Paper No. 25) that was determined by the examiner to lack          
               compliance with 37 CFR § 1.192.                                                                                      
                                                               - 3 -                                                                





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007