Appeal No. 1999-1560
Application No. 08/974,108
We have carefully considered the claims, the applied prior art
references, and the respective positions articulated by appellants
and the examiner. As a consequence of our review, we will reverse
the obviousness rejections of claims 1 through 20.
All of appellants' arguments are directed to whether or not it
would have been obvious to make the circular elements of Shimizu
(i.e., the hollow portion of the main frame, the flexible cable, and
the flexible member) an oval shape. Accordingly, we will limit our
discussion to the modification to an oval shape for Shimizu's
circular elements.
The examiner states (Answer, page 4),
It is noted that applicants have not presented any
criticality, within the specification, of an oval cable
and an oval member which presents that the particular
configuration of the cable and member is significant or
anything more than one of numerous configurations a person
of ordinary skill in the art would find obvious for the
purpose of providing a more efficient an [sic] ink jet
head....
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having
ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
made to have used oval cables and oval members in Shimizu
et al. for the purpose of providing a more efficient an
[sic] ink jet head.
The examiner (Answer, page 6) dismisses appellants' declaration under
37 CFR § 1.132 as "lack[ing] technical validity," since it includes
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007