Appeal No. 1998-2311
Application No. 08/401,869
178 (CCPA 1967), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 1057 (1968), reh’g
denied, 390 U.S. 1000 (1968). Accordingly, since the Examiner
has not established a prima facie case of obviousness, the
rejection of independent claims 1, 12, 19, and 22, and claims
3-5, 8-11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 20, 21, 23-27, and 32-37 dependent
thereon, over the combination of Heinrich, Walker, and
O’Donnell is not sustained.
Turning to a consideration of the Examiner’s 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 rejection of dependent claims 6, 7, 18, and 28-31 in
which the Harada and Mizutani references are added to the
combination of Heinrich, Walker, and O’Donnell, we do not
sustain this rejection as well. It is apparent from the
Examiner’s analysis (Answer, pages 7 and 8) that Harada and
Mizutani are relied on solely to address the claimed segmented
structure of the control electrodes. We find nothing,
however, in the disclosures of Harada or Mizutani which would
overcome the innate deficiencies of Heinrich, Walker, and
O’Donnell discussed supra.
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007