Appeal No. 97-2943
Application No. 08/319,174
Claims 1 through 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as unpatentable over Kimura in view of Nozawa and Takahashi.
Reference is made to the briefs and answer for the
respective positions of appellants and the examiner.
OPINION
We affirm.
The examiner contends that, with regard to claims 1
through 3 and 8, Kimura teaches the claimed subject matter but
for the nozzles being elevated in the vertical position above
the ink. The examiner relies on Nozawa for the teaching of
providing a suction tube, as in instant claims 2 and 8, and
Takahashi is relied on for the teaching of placing nozzle
openings in an upward direction. The examiner reasons that it
would have been obvious to combine these teachings so as to
rotate the printhead of Kimura to an upright position, as
taught by Takahashi, “in order to allow bubbles...[to] have a
direct path to exit the nozzles.” The examiner further
reasons that it would have been obvious to apply suction to an
area directly adjacent the nozzles, as taught by Nozawa, “in
order to prevent soiling of the interior of the ink jet
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007