Appeal No. 96-2515
Application 08/037,567
It is appellant’s position that Konomi ‘867 does not teach first and second acoustic guides
that are coaxial with one another as recited in dependent claim 11. Appellant contends, without elaboration,
that while Figs. 5 and 6 of the reference may disclose first and second acoustic guides, these guides are not
coaxial. This is not persuasive. For example, in Fig. 5 guide 6 is within guide 2c, and the two guides are
clearly coaxial.
Concerning claim 13, we agree with the examiner that Konomi’s waveguides have portions
thereof oriented orthogonally with respect to one another. Although the acoustic guides 2c and 6 in Fig. 5 of
the reference are not themselves orthogonal, the end face or portion of guide 6 at 6c is orthogonal to guide 2c
along its axis.
With respect to claims 14 and 20, appellant contends that the language of these claims is not
met by Fig. 5 of Konomi because the claims require that the guides be parallel, and guides 2b and 6 of
Konomi converge, and because the guides do not have outer portions in transverse planes. This contention is
not persuasive because guides 6 and 2c of the reference are parallel in the same sense that appellant’s guides
102 and 104 of its Fig. 5 are parallel. Furthermore, the guide openings at the left ends of the guides are in
“different transverse planes” as recited in claims 14 and 20.
Claims 3, 7, 10, 12, 18 and 19 are not separately argued and fall with claims 1, 2, 9, 11, 13,
14, 16, 17 and 20.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007