Appeal No. 1997-3730
Application No. 08/095,147
solutions of Lee and Harrington to the undesirable charge
transfer or arcing problem are completely opposite in
approach. Further, the problem of excess electrode DC bias
addressed by the Zener diode placement in Tai does not appear
to exist in Lee, Harrington, or any of the other prior art of
record. Accordingly, the Examiner’s obviousness rejection of
independent claim 13, and of claim 14 dependent thereon cannot
be sustained.
In summary, we have not sustained the Examiner’s 35
U.S.C.
§ 103 rejection of any of the claims on appeal. Thus, the
Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1 to 14 is reversed.
REVERSED
JERRY SMITH )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007