Appeal No. 1997-2856
Application 08/394,251
Nothing requires that the "maximum dimension" refer to the
same dimension for the transverse lamp section and the
cylindrical lamp section; e.g., it would be possible to
compare a length with a diameter. The Examiner's
interpretation based on the diameter dimension is inconsistent
with the claim language because the diameters are clearly not
the "maximum dimension" of the transverse lamp section or the
cylindrical lamp section in Skwirut. The Examiner's finding
that the maximum length of the transverse section is smaller
than the length of the cylindrical lamp section is clearly
erroneous; the length must be measured along the lamp and the
traverse lamp section is approximately twice as long as one of
the cylindrical lamp sections.
The Examiner also reasoned (FR6-7): "As to placing a
sharp bend in the tube [of Skwirut] to make a U-shape, it is
very well known that tubes for gas discharge tubes can be bent
to any desired shape and to bend the tube to a single U-shape
with a sharp bend would have been obvious to one of ordianry
[sic] skill in the art not only given the well known fact that
tubes can be bent to that desired [shape] but especially given
that of Skwiruit [sic] who teaches multiple U-shapes."
- 12 -
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007