Appeal No. 95-3273
Application 08/136,856
same as 0.03 centimeters, these piezoelectric elements also fall
within the following definition of "film" in IEEE Standard
Dictionary of Electrical and Electronics Terms 219 (1972 ed.):
"(1) (rotating machinery). Sheeting having a nominal thickness
not greater than 0.030 centimeters and being substantially
homogeneous in nature." In holding that Rokurota's piezoelectric
ceramic element 38 is a "thin film of piezoelectric material," we
are mindful of our conclusion, supra, that the artisan would have
construed the phrase "substantially inflexible substrate" to mean
a substrate substantially incapable of vibrating in the manner of
a diaphragm. This does not necessarily imply that the claimed
"thin film of piezoelectric material" would be capable of
vibrating in the manner of a diaphragm if it were not laminated
to the substrate.
For the foregoing reasons, the rejection of claim 1 as
anticipated by Rokurota is affirmed. The rejection of claim 2 as
anticipated by that reference is affirmed because it was not
separately argued. In re Nielson, 816 F.2d 1567, 1572, 2 USPQ2d
1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1987).
Claims 3-11 stand rejected under § 103 as unpatentable
over Rokurota. Of these claims, only claim 3 is separately
argued by appellant. This claim requires that the piezoelectric
sandwich and substrate be sealed between two water resistant
-9-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007