Appeal No. 96-0948 Page 11
Application No. 08/262,400
Uniroyal ,Inc. V. Rudkin-Wiley Corp., 837 F.2d 1044, 1052, 5
USPQ2d 1434, 1052 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 825
(1988).
Claims 5 and 16 depend from claims 1 and 12,
respectively, and require the presence of a pre-expander means
interposed between the boresight target generation means and
the telescope for magnifying a signal transmitted along the
first optical path. In the Sud device, beams are emitted from
sources and then are passed through holes to impinge directly
upon mirrors that are shown as being of flat configuration.
There is no explicit teaching in Sud for expanding these
beams, and the examiner’s conclusion that such action takes
place is, at best, conjecture. It therefore is our view that
Sud fails to establish a prima facie case of obviousness with
regard to these two claims, and we will not sustain the
rejection.
We reach the same conclusion with regard to the shutter
means recited in claims 6, 7, 17 and 18. In the Sud
apparatus, control of the path of beams between alternative
routes is accomplished by deflecting them with movable prisms.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007