Appeal No. 1998-0659
Application No. 08/264,527
do with the electrical stimulus signal applied to the coil for
tinnitus treatment is found unavailing as Matsushima also
teaches the carrier frequency to be near 30 kHz, as found
above. Similarly, Appellants' assertion that the circuit of
figure 1 of Matsushima provides no modulation of the stimulus
signal because the circuit contains no modulator, is
unavailing because of Matsushima's disclosure of using a
carrier frequency which is modulated by a stimulation
frequency.17
Accordingly, we sustain the rejection of claim 1 under
35 U.S.C. 102(a).
B. Rejection of claims 10 and 11 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
Appellants argue generally that the limitations of these18
claims are not suggested by the prior art. Appellants then
assert that there is no factual basis for the proposition in
the final rejection that the Matsushima coil vibrates, and
that it is well known that an inductive coil such as that of
17 Note, inter alia, section 7.1 where Matsushima discusses
the use of modulation frequencies of 10, 100 and 1000 Hz upon
a carrier signal.
18 Brief, page 6.
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007