Appeal No. 1999-2794
Application No. 08/597,035
object in a primary scanning direction, contrary to the claimed "transfer command signal
output means."
We find appellant's arguments to be persuasive. Appellant points out (Brief at 8)
that the claim 1 "transfer command signal output means" refers to structure enabling a
vertical shift -- from the shift gate to the shift register -- rather than a horizontal shift out of
the shift register. Hosokawa's teaching that the frequencies at the horizontal transfer
sections 502 and 505 (Fig. 1) do not have to be equal, as noted on pages 4 and 9 of the
Answer, is inapposite to the requirements of instant claim 1. Additionally, appellant's
arguments in the Reply Brief are well taken. Hosokawa is directed to a different problem
from object scanning. We do not see, on this record, how the Hosokawa reference might
have commended itself to an artisan having knowledge as represented by appellant's
Figure 12, such that the combined teachings would lead to the subject matter of instant
claim 1. We therefore do not sustain the section 103 rejection of claim 1.
For the subject matter of instant independent claim 7, the examiner adds the
teachings of Nakajima to the combination of the APA and Hosokawa. The examiner refers
(Answer at 5-7) to the index levers 14 in place on an image reader, which are used in
defining a valid area EB (Nakajima, Fig. 3) and invalid areas EA and EC. "The examiner
reads the [in]valid area EA and EC as containing the subplurality of photosensitive
elements which are not exposed to light(shaded)." (Answer at 6.) The examiner
reiterates, in the sentence bridging pages 11 and 12 of the Answer, and at page 15, that
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007