Appeal No. 97-0128
Application No. 08/098,989
generated microwaves to develop a conditioned electron beam.
We note that the relevant portion of independent claim 1
recites:
a magnetic wiggler responsive to the
electron beam from said producing means
and to the microwaves from said
generating means for developing the
conditioned electron beam of final quality
....
The Examiner contends that the illustrated Figure 1 embodiment
in Brau including wiggler 22 meets the above recited feature.
Upon careful review of the Brau reference, however, we
agree with Appellants’ stated position in the Briefs. It is
apparent from Brau’s Figure 1 illustration and accompanying
description that wiggler 22 is not responsive to both the
electron beam and to generated microwaves to develop a
conditioned beam. As pointed out by Appellants (supplemental
Reply Brief, page 5), only the electron beam 20 is applied to
the wiggler 22 in Brau with microwave energy applied only to
accelerator 12.
We note that Appellants and the Examiner have reiterated
arguments as to the nature of the optical cavity defined by
the optical reflectors 24 and 26 in Brau. In our view, the
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007