Appeal No. 1996-3262
Application No. 08/141,632
art. In his second Examiner's Answer 15, the Examiner admits
Kimoto et al shows a diamond semiconductor diode and not a fluid
sensing device.
Turning to claims 1-3, we find that in addition to the
preamble's recited use of the electric device "for monitoring a
fluid," the body of each of these claims provides further
limitations directed to the fluid. In the body of claims 1 and
2, "said second surface is in contact with the fluid" is recited.
Claim 3 recites16 "said diamond film has an exposed surface to
the fluid to be monitored." As these elements of the claim are
not disclosed by Kimoto et al this rejection is reversed.
B. Rejection of claims 1-3 and 8 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by Nakahata et al .
Appellants submit17 that Nakahata et al relates to a
thermistor and not a fluid flow sensor and makes no mention of
sensing a fluid. With respect to claim 8, Appellants
specifically note that Nakahata et al does not suggest measuring
a fluid passing by in a path.
15
15 Page 1
16
16 At lines 3-4
17
17 Brief, page 7 and Reply Brief, page 2
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007