Appeal No. 1998-2971
Application No. 08/690,274
In the 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of claims 5 and 6,
the examiner is of the opinion (Answer, page 4) that “[t]he
support arms of the radiation detector of Higashi et al. have
a width greater than the spacing between adjacent bolometers
(Fig. 5).” Appellants argue (Brief, page 3) that “even if the
sloping sides are considered ‘support arms’, then the width
(sloped direction) of the sides is less than the spacing
between bolometers.” Turning to Figure 5 of Higashi, we find
that the figure is completely devoid of any relative
dimensions for the support arms and the spacing between the
bolometers, and the explanation of the same in the disclosure
is equally lacking in any type of explanation of relative
dimensions. In view of the lack of such relative dimensions,
we will reverse the 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of claims 5
and 6.
Turning to the provisional double patenting rejection,
appellants argue (Brief, page 3) that “both this application
and application serial no. 08/690,277 were filed on 7/19/96
and will both expire 20 years later, so a terminal disclaimer
is moot.” In response, the examiner indicates (Answer, page
5) that appellants’ reliance “on a common termination date to
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007