Appeal No. 1998-0865
Application No. 08/488,455
Hubbard teaches (column 1, lines 65-68) using a domed-
shaped configuration for a ceramic piezo-electric element for
"a transducer that does not require a diaphragm, as well as a
transducer that provides a chamber of lesser space." The
structure disclosed by Hubbard thus provides two advantages:
the diaphragm may be eliminated, thereby reducing the number
of elements, and the transducer may occupy less space along
the substrate, thereby allowing for high density integration.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan
to use a dome-shaped transducer in the device of Takeuchi I or
II and eliminate the diaphragm (i.e., the ceramic substrate)
for both stated advantages. Alternatively, if removing the
diaphragm were not desired, it would have been obvious to the
skilled artisan that even with the ceramic substrate, one
could still obtain the benefit of reduced space by using the
dome shaped transducer.
Combining the teachings of Hubbard with Takeuchi I or II
would yield a flat substrate with a dome-shaped transducer
attached thereto. Appellants even admit (Brief, page 13) that
"the combination . . . might suggest using convex-shaped
inkwells . . . so that the inkwells could be formed closer
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007