Appeal No. 2000-0335
Application No. 08/780,551 Page 7
We observe that claim 1 recites the "second electrode
spanning the orifice in the third electrode." Claim 7 contains
similar language. We find that neither claim 1 nor claim 7
requires that the second electrode fully span the orifice in the
third electrode, and note that the amendment containing the
proposed claim language "fully" was not entered by the examiner,
as acknowledged by appellants (brief, page 5). To meet the
language of claims 1 and 7, the second electrode need only span
the orifice in the third electrode, and need not completely cover
the orifice as asserted by appellants.
Fujii discloses (col. 2, lines 15-19) “reference numeral 1
designates signal electrodes to which voltages may be
independently and individually applied, reference numeral 3
denotes base electrodes which continuously span distances between
a plurality of holes.” Fujii further discloses (col. 2, lines
22-25) that “[d]esignated by 4 are holes forming openings which
extend through the signal electrodes 1, the base electrodes 3 and
the insulating members 2 with the same cross-sectional area.” In
addition (col. 5, lines 44-53), when condensation of the toner or
admixture of rough foreign materials with the toner occurs during
long use of the toner, the openings 4 may become clogged. In
figure 5B (col. 6, lines 9-13), the openings 4 of the insulating
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007