Ex parte STOLIS et al. - Page 8




               Appeal No. 94-3631                                                                                                     
               Application 07/883,513                                                                                                 


               uniform, yet highly diffuse [brief, pages 11-12].  The examiner replies that the lamp in Concannon                     
               is in the integrated environment of many other modules and subunits, and that the treatment of the                     
               surfaces to be highly diffusive is inherent [answer, pages 8-9].  Once again, we find ourselves in                     
               agreement with the position taken by appellants.                                                                       
               The claims recite that the illumination source means has the lamp means and the reflecting-                            
               diffusive surfaces as part of an integrated housing or vessel.  Concannon has no such housing or                       
               vessel which integrates the lamp means and the reflecting-diffusive surfaces.  It is error to                          
               consider everything in the Concannon imaging unit as meeting the claimed integrated housing or                         
               vessel.  The lamp means and the reflecting-diffusive surfaces must be separately contained in an                       
               integrated housing or vessel.  Concannon does not meet this limitation.                                                
               We also agree with appellants that the examiner erred in finding that every lamp generates a                           
               highly-uniform, yet highly diffuse illumination beam, and that the surfaces of Concannon are                           
               inherently diffusive.  There is nothing on this record to support these positions of the examiner.                     
               Since Concannon does not disclose every limitation of claims 22-33, we do not sustain the                              
               rejection of these claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102.                                                                       










                                                                  8                                                                   





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007