Appeal No. 2000-0335
Application No. 08/780,551 Page 16
electrode 3 (second electrode) and signal electrode 1 (third
electrode) constitutes movement of the toner "between" electrodes
1 and 3.
Thus, we find that movement of toner between the edge surfaces of
electrodes 1 and 3, and the edge surface of insulating member 2,
is movement between the electrodes. We agree with appellants
that movement of the toner through opening 4 of Fujii can be
considered to be movement through the electrodes. However, we
find that as broadly drafted, movement of toner though opening 4
can also be described as movement of toner "between" the walls of
the structures 1-3, through which opening 4 is provided, as
suggested by Fujii. We are cognizant of the differences between
appellants' disclosed structure and the disclosure of Fujii.
However, we find that these differences are not recited in claim
25. From all of the above, the rejection of claim 25 under 35
U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed.
We turn next to claim 26, which depends from independent
claim 25. Claim 26 recites that the second electrode spans the
orifice in the third electrode. We reverse the rejection of
claim 26, based upon our findings, supra, with respect to claim
1.
We turn next to the rejection of claims 3, 4, 6, 9, 11, and
20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Fujii considered
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007