Appeal No. 96-1474
Application 08/041,765
Scott 3,755,706 Aug. 28, 1973
Claims 1 through 5, 8, 9 and 11 through 21 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Veith in view of Scott.
Reference is made to the brief and answer for the
respective positions of appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
At the outset, we note that, in accordance with
appellant's grouping of the claims at page 5 of the brief, all
claims will stand or fall together. Accordingly, we will focus
our attention on independent claim 1.
The examiner contends that Veith discloses the focusing
structure as claimed but for the non-magnetic spacers interlaced
between adjacent polepieces. The examiner further contends that
since Scott does disclose the placement of non-magnetic spacers
between adjacent polepieces in a focusing structure, it would
have been obvious, within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 103, to have
included interlaced non-magnetic spacers in Veith since it "would
have provided the advantageous benefits of the vacuum sealing
spacers, suggested by Scott, to other functionally analogous
focussing arrangements in the same field of endeavor" [Paper No.
9, page 4].
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007