Appeal No. 1998-1418
Application 08/313,249
no dispute that Goodman functions in the manner as stated by the
examiner. However, we agree with appellants (brief, pg. 19) that
“Goodman . . .[fails] to teach or suggest measurement of an ON
time and OFF time, where determination of the ON time and OFF
time is based on the measurement and control of the drive of
the ultrasonic vibrator in accordance with the determination.”
We find that although Goodman establishes ON and OFF
times for the delivery of medicine from the atomizer, these times
are established by the breathing patterns of the patient and not
by measuring the duration of the ON and OFF times of the drive
of the ultrasonic vibrator. We also find that the teaching of
“driving said ultrasonic vibrator continuously when the ON time
of said operating switch is greater than or equal to the pre-
determined time” of claim 46 is also not disclosed or suggested
in Goodman.
For the above reasons, we will not sustain the
examiner’s rejection of independent claim 46 on appeal under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based on Anthony, Bendig, Takahashi, and
Goodman.
22
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007