Appeal No. 2000-1526
Application No. 08/902,196
a stand for mounting the drive coil in the vicinity of the acoustic
chamber; and
a magnetic-to-acoustic converter situated in proximity to the driving
coil.
The examiner relies on the following references:
Beaty et al. (Beaty) 3,985,977 Oct. 12, 1976
Frye et al. (Frye) 4,065,647 Dec. 27, 1977
Marutake et al. (Marutake) 5,101,575 Apr. 23, 1991
Claims 31-44 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as relying
on an inadequate written description.
Claims 35-38 and 42-44 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, as being indefinite.
Claims 31-47 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
Marutake in view of Beaty and Frye.
Reference is made to the brief and the examiner’s supplemental answer
[answer] for the respective positions of appellants and the examiner.
OPINION
With regard to the rejection of claims 35-38 and 42-44 under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph, it is the examiner’s position that claims 35 and 42 recite the
limitations of “the magnetic drive unit” and “the specified drive characteristic” in lines
10-12 and 12-14, respectively and that these recited limitations have no antecedent
bases.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007