Ex parte GOOCH et al. - Page 4




          Appeal No. 1998-2971                                                        
          Application No. 08/690,274                                                  


                         of support arms supporting said each                         
                         bolometer on said substrate, said support                    
                         arms of width greater than the spacing                       
                         between adjacent bolometers, said support                    
                         arms including conductors connecting said                    
                             bolometers to said circuitry with said                  
          bolometers connecting in parallel.                                          
               The references relied on by the examiner are:                          
          Higashi et al. (Higashi)           5,300,915                Apr.            
          5, 1994                                                                     
          Hornbeck                      0 354 369                Feb. 14,             
          1990                                                                        
          (published European Patent Application)                                     
               Claims 1 through 4 and 7 through 9 stand rejected under                
          35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Hornbeck.                        
               Claims 5 and 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as              
          being anticipated by Higashi.                                               
               Claims 1 through 9 stand provisionally rejected under the              
          judicially created doctrine of double patenting over claims 1,              
          2 and 4 through 10 of copending Application Number 08/690,277.              
               Reference is made to the brief and the answer for the                  
          respective positions of the appellants and the examiner.                    
                                       OPINION                                        
               With the exception of the 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of              
          claims 5 and 6, all of the other rejections are sustained.                  
               In response to the rejection of claims 1 through 4 and                 
                                          4                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007