Ex parte YAMANASHI et al. - Page 5




          Appeal No. 96-0879                                                          
          Application 08/101,228                                                      


          of a conductive metal probe 22 having an exposed tip 20, a                  
          current monitor 24 for measuring the electrical current                     
          induced in the probe and a tuner 26 for adjusting and                       
          optimizing the induced electrical current passing through the               
          probe.  These components are connected to one another and to                
          ground as shown in Figure 2.                                                





               The statement relating to Yamanashi appearing on page 10               
          in the appellants’ specification   reads as follows:                        

               The cautery instruments of [appellants’] Figures 2,                    
               3, 4 and 5 are to be utilized with electrical                          
               circuitry illustrated in [appellants’] Figure[s] 6                     
               and 7.  Inasmuch as many of the components of that                     
               shown in                                                               
               Figure 6 are identical or similar to that taught in U.S.               
               Patent No. 5,019,076 [Yamanashi], reliance upon said                   
          patent    is made to complete this disclosure, if necessary.                
          In other       words, the parameters or specifications of the               
          various components of Figure 6 will not be described since                  
          it is     believed that the same are disclosed in U.S. Patent               
          No.       5,019,076 or would be obvious to one having ordinary              
          skill     in the art.                                                       
               The essence of the examiner’s position in maintaining the              
          appealed rejection is that                                                  

                                         -5-                                          





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007