Appeal No. 98-1030
Application 08/424,115
a continuous transparent cover for covering surfaces of
both said illumination and viewing windows; and
a window glass that is attached to and covers said
viewing window, said window glass having a flat front surface
and a flat rear surface, said window glass having a diameter
large enough so that a virtual image of an outer edge portion
of said window glass, which is produced by single reflection
from an inner side of an outer surface of said transparent
cover, lies outside the visual field of said objective optical
system, said illumination window being uncovered by said
window glass.
The references relied upon by the examiner as evidence of
obviousness are:
Ogiu 4,419,987 Dec. 13,
1983
Ohkuwa 4,747,661 May 31, 1988
Klein 4,809,678 Mar. 7, 1989
Miyanaga et al.(Miyanaga) 5,150,702 Sep. 29, 1992
(filed Mar. 29,
1991)
Takahashi 5,257,617 Nov. 2,
1993
(filed Dec. 20,
1990)
Danna et al.(Danna) 5,278,642 Jan. 11,
1994
(filed Feb. 26,
1992)2
The appealed claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
2Considering the 35 U.S.C. § 119 benefit claimed by the
appellants in this application, the Danna patent would not
appear to be prior art with respect to the subject matter
recited in the appealed claims. Given our decision in this
appeal, however, this issue is of no practical moment.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007