Appeal No. 1999-1854
Application No. 08/633,616
said signal generator applies a subsequent
charge signal after said predetermined interval to
displace said diaphragm to contact said stationary
wall to reduce residual vibration in said diaphragm
after application of said charge signal.
The Examiner relies on the following prior art:
Fujii et al. (Fujii) 629,503 Dec. 21, 1994
(European Patent)
Claims 1-21 stand finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
102(b) as being anticipated by Fujii.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, reference is made to the Briefs and Answer for the 1
respective details.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejection advanced by the Examiner and the
evidence of anticipation relied upon by the Examiner as
support for the rejection. We have, likewise, reviewed and
taken into consideration, in reaching our decision,
Appellants’ arguments set forth in the Briefs along with the
1The Appeal Brief was filed November 6, 1998. In
response to the Examiner’s Answer dated February 16, 1999, a
Reply Brief was filed April 19, 1999 which was acknowledged by
the Examiner without further comment on January 12, 2000.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007