Appeal No. 1996-1891
Application 08/058,478
specification, does not provide any data which compares the
results of locating the damping material only near the
transducer with the results of locating the damping material
elsewhere in the waveguide. Instead, appellant's Figure 3
compares the results of locating the damping material only
near the transducer (heavy trace) with the results of
employing no damping material anywhere in the waveguide (thin
trace) (Spec. at 2, lines 7-12). Compare Richardson-Vicks,
Inc. v. Upjohn Co., 122 F.3d 1476, 1483, 44 USPQ2d 1181, 1186
(Fed. Cir. 1997) ("the PTO must consider comparative data in
the specification in determining whether the claimed invention
provides unexpected results") (emphasis omitted) (quoting In
re Soni, 54 F.3d 746, 750, 34 USPQ2d 1684, 1687 (Fed. Cir.
1995)).
For the foregoing reasons, we will affirm the § 103
rejection of claim 1 based on Bose in view of Taddeo. The
rejection of claims 2 and 3, which are not separately argued,
is also affirmed. In re Nielson, 816 F.2d 1567, 1572,
2 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1987).
Dependent claims 4-6 are separately argued. Claim 4
specifies that the first of the waveguide portions near the
- 12 -
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007