Appeal No. 96-1555
Application 08/229,619
Claim 33
Claim 33 depends from claim 20 and recites that the angle
between mirrors is "divisible into 360 an odd number of times
to form an image with an odd number of image segments."
Appellant argues that Akins and Coates teach that the
angles between the mirrors must be divisible into 360 an even
number of times and do not teach an odd number of times
(Br13). We agree.
The Examiner apparently relies on "routine skill in the
art," "design choice," and the general teaching in Coates that
various changes can be made in the details of construction.
These reasons are not persuasive for the reasons discussed in
connection with claims 1-8, 11-19, 35, and 36. The Examiner
has failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness.
The rejection of claim 33 is reversed.
- 10 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007