Appeal No. 1997-3301
Application No. 08/159,879
This rejection was not understood since only the
chopper per se is being claimed and not the manner
in which it is attached in the FLIR. The connection
is conventional as implied from the specification.
See Specification, p. 9 (“An aperture 7 is disposed at the
center of the chopper 1 for securing the chopper to a device
which will rotate the chopper in standard manner.”). The
examiner has failed to provide any evidence to the contrary.
Therefore, for the reasons set forth by appellants, the
rejection of claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph is reversed.
Conclusion
The rejection of claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Ohtaka in view of the various
combinations of Isono, Suzuki, Trotta, Horigome and/or Hayashi
is reversed. The rejection of claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. §
112, first and second paragraphs, is also reversed.
REVERSED
BRADLEY R. GARRIS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007