Appeal No. 2001-0255
Application 08/733,567
Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1554, 220 USPQ
303, 313 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
Claims 1-4 stand or fall together as a single group
[brief, page 5]. The rejection is set forth on page 2 of the
final rejection [Paper No. 7] which is incorporated into the
examiner’s answer [answer, page 3]. With respect to
representative, independent claim 1, appellant argues that Jung
discloses that all the sound waves radiating from the cut-out
portions of the speaker are collected by the sound collecting
tubes which is contrary to the claimed invention which collects
only a portion of the sound waves [brief, pages 5-8]. The
examiner responds that in the fourth, fifth and sixth embodiments
of Jung, the horn amplifies and radiates only a portion of the
sound waves which are radiated from the rear side through the
frame [answer, pages 3-4]. Appellant responds that the examiner
has misinterpreted the structure of the fourth, fifth and sixth
embodiments of Jung [reply brief].
We agree with the position argued by appellant for
essentially the reasons explained in the reply brief. The
disclosure of Jung does not support the examiner’s
interpretation. Specifically, with respect to the fourth
embodiment, for example, Jung discloses that “[b]ecause the inlet
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007