Appeal No. 1998-1418
Application 08/313,249
elastically prestressed on the atomizing disk 21 via the spring
(col. 2, lines 24-27). The claims dependent from claim 1 should
also be reconsidered by the examiner on remand.
With regard to the examiner’s rejection of claim 28
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Anthony,
Bendig and Takahashi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in
view of Maehara and Sugimoto, claim 28 is specifically directed
to an ultrasonic atomizer with a particular form of the mesh
plate. The resilient biasing member and the liquid vessel
penetrated by the lower end of the pump shaft of claim 1 are not
required in claim 28 on appeal. We will now discuss the prior
art further relied upon by the examiner.
Maehara discloses a liquid atomizer with an electric
vibrator. This reference was primarily used by the examiner to
show the specifics of the nozzle base 27 (mesh plate) as shown
in Figures 4 and 5.
Sugimoto discloses a shower device having a nozzle
plate 4 which shows recesses between apertures 7 and peripheral
wall surfaces of the apertures projecting from the inlet side.
13
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007