Ex Parte Gebele et al - Page 2


                   Appeal No. 2006-3152                                                                 Page 2                     
                   Application No. 10/168,492                                                                                      

                   Representative claim 18 is reproduced as follows:                                                               
                   18. Device for reading out information stored in a storage layer, having an erasing                             
                   means for erasing information stored in the storage layer by means of an erasure                                
                   radiation, wherein the erasing means includes a first erasing source for outputting erasure                     
                   radiation of a first intensity, and a second erasing source for outputting erasure radiation                    
                   of a second intensity, and the first intensity is larger than the second intensity, wherein                     
                   the device further includes control means for driving the erasing means such that the                           
                   erasing means can be switched into an on state in which the erasure radiation is output                         
                   onto the storage layer at least during the entire period between the reading out of the                         
                   information of a first image stored in the storage layer and the subsequent storage of                          
                   information of a second image in the storage layer and into an off state in which no                            
                   erasure radiation is output onto the storage layer.                                                             
                   The examiner relies on the following references:                                                                
                   Umemoto et al. (Umemoto)  5,013,916  May 07, 1991                                                               
                   Muller et al. (Muller)   WO 99/28765  June 10, 1999                                                             
                   Claims 18-20, 23, 24, 26-32, and 34-43 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).  As                             
                   evidence of obviousness the examiner offers Umemoto taken alone with respect to claims                          
                   18-20, 23, 24, 26, 27, 29-32, 34-41, and 43, and adds Muller with respect to claims 28                          
                   and 42.                                                                                                         
                   Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the examiner, we make reference                               
                   to the brief and the answer for the respective details thereof.                                                 
                   OPINION                                                                                                         
                   We have carefully considered the subject matter on appeal, the rejections advanced                              
                   by the examiner and the evidence of obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support                          
                   for the rejections.  We have, likewise, reviewed and taken into consideration, in reaching                      
                   our decision, the appellants’ arguments set forth in the brief along with the examiner’s                        
                   rationale in support of the rejections and arguments in rebuttal set forth in the examiner’s                    
                   answer.                                                                                                         






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

Last modified: November 3, 2007