Appeal No. 95-2640
Application No. 07/949,289
this rejection because we find no indication in Stoudenheimer
of the claimed shutter electrode means having a rim with the
required location, thickness and shape. Further,
Stoudenheimer mentions nothing whatsoever about equipotential
lines so it is not understood how Stoudenheimer can disclose
or even suggest the shape of the rim of a shutter electrode
which conforms “to the predetermined shape of said line.”
The examiner identifies the combination of elements 22
and 42 of Stoudenheimer as the claimed “first electrode
means...for producing an electric field” and then identifies
one of the elements of this combination, i.e., element 22, as
also constituting the claimed “shutter electrode means.” It
is not clear how a single element 22 in Stoudenheimer can be
considered to be part of both the first electrode means and
the shutter electrode means. Moreover, even if element 22
could, somehow, be considered a “shutter electrode means,” we
find absolutely nothing in Stoudenheimer evenly remotely
intimating that such a “shutter electrode means” has a
rim...positioned in a location where one of said
equipotential lines [no mention of any equipotential
lines in Stoudenheimer] is to be produced, having a shape
substantially conforming to the predetermined shape
of said line, and having a minimal thickness...such
that...the shutter electrode does not substantially disturb
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007