Appeal No. 96-1474
Application 08/041,765
facilitate thermal conduction from the helix 6 to the envelope 7"
[column 3, lines 1-2], there would have been no reason, other
than impermissibly picking and choosing elements to meet the
claimed subject matter, to apply these teachings to the device of
Veith. There is no vacuum tight envelope around tunnel 25 in
Veith because whatever envelope there is is provided by soft iron
plates 16 and 17 which enclose the bar magnet structure. Thus,
there would have been no need to provide non-magnetic spacers for
providing a vacuum tight envelope around beam tunnel 25 in Veith.
With regard to Scott's teaching of "thermal conduction," this
would not appear to have been a problem in Veith because, as
explained at column 5, lines 32-66, thereof, in explaining how
one gets to Figure 4 from Figure 3, Veith describes how the
vertical magnets in Figure 3 may be made progressively thicker in
the z-direction until "the magnets abut against each other..." or
until the "places of abutment are allowed to pass into one
another..." Such an abutment, itself, would result in a
structure (Figure 4 of Veith) with good thermal conductivity.
Separate non-magnetic spacers would not have been necessary to
provide for such thermal conductivity nor would there be any
place to put such non-magnetic spacers in the structure of Veith
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007