Appeal No. 96-2162
Application No. 08/265,561
OPINION
As the examiner explains, Heinz discloses piezoelectric
devices acting in various modes; however, Heinz fails to
disclose the claimed dimorphs. The examiner relies on
Staufenberg for the teaching of dimorphs employed in a multi-
axes positioning device wherein the dimorphs permit additive
expansion and contraction so that the total movement of an
engaging member is greater than the displacement of a single
piezoelectric plate. The examiner then concludes that it
would have been obvious to employ the dimorph of Staufenberg
in Heinz so that Heinz would have the same advantage, i.e.,
grounded outer electrodes and additive motion for the same
applied voltage, taught by Staufenberg.
In essence, the examiner follows the same reasoning
applied by this Board in our previous decisions of May 6, 1992
and April 26, 1994. That reasoning was bottomed on the use of
dimorphs, as shown in Figure 11 of Staufenberg, for the
piezoelectric tilt and tip actuator wafers 45 and 46 in Figure
2 of Heinz, resulting in stacked dimorphs as required by the
claims.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007