Ex Parte Kabasawa et al - Page 3




          Appeal No. 2003-1141                                                        
          Application 09/572,745                                                      


               Attention is directed to appellants’ main and reply briefs             
          (Paper Nos. 15 and 17) and to the examiner’s answer (Paper No.              
          16) for the respective positions of the appellants and the                  
          examiner regarding the merits of these rejections.2                         
                                     DISCUSSION                                       
          I. The 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection                                         
               Muhlhoff discloses a gas friction vacuum pump having a                 
          plurality of differently configured pump stages which can be                
          detachably connected to one another in various arrangements to              
          adapt the pump for different applications.  The Figure 3                    
          embodiment relied on by the examiner comprises a filling stage 35           
          and a molecular pump stage 3, 12.  The filling stage includes an            
          outer housing section 36 having a reducer 5 welded thereto and a            
          rotor section 37 composed of a conically configured central part            
          38 and webs 39.  The molecular pump stage includes an outer                 
          cylinder 3 and a rotor 9 composed of a hub 11, radial webs 22 and           
          a cylindrical section 12.                                                   




               2 In the final rejection (Paper No. 8), claims 1, 3 through            
          11, 13 through 16 and 21 through 29 also stood rejected under 35            
          U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No.                  
          3,157,793 to Adkins.  Upon consideration of the arguments                   
          advanced in the main brief, the examiner has withdrawn this                 
          rejection (see page 3 in the answer).                                       
                                          3                                           




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

Last modified: November 3, 2007