Ex parte USUI et al. - Page 3




          Appeal No. 2000-0166                                                        
          Application No. 07/809,042                                                  


          operates properly and efficiently.  A further illustration of               
          the invention can be obtained from the following claim.                     
          1. A piezo-electric/electrostrictive film type chip comprising:             
               a ceramic substrate having a spacer plate having a windows-            
          disposed pattern comprising at least a plurality of window                  
          portions and a thin closure plate for closing the window                    
          portions which is                                                           
          unitarily connected with the spacer plate, said window portions             
          and closure plate forming pressurizing rooms:                               
               a plurality of piezo-electric/electrostrictive working                 
          portions each including a laminate of a lower electrode, a                  
          piezo-electric/ electrostrictive layer, and an upper electrode              
          and each being disposed at a closure portion of each window on              
          the outer surface of the closure plate, all of said working                 
          portions being disposed in a single plane; and                              
               a pin hole for positioning disposed in or near the center              
          of gravity of the windows-disposed pattern, the pin hole (i)                
          being separated from said pressurizing rooms and (ii) extending             
          in a direction perpendicular to said plane.                                 
               The examiner relies on the following reference:                        
          Maltsev             4,752,789                     Jun. 21, 1988             
          Admitted Prior Art                                                          

               Claims 1-3 stand rejected under 35 § U.S.C. § 103(a) as                
          being unpatentable over the admitted prior art in view of                   
          Maltsev.                                                                    




                                          3                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007