Appeal No. 2001-0713
Application 09/016,304
polarization. The examiner finds that change of shape has no
patentable significance without unexpected results. The
examiner, therefore, finds that it would have been obvious to the
artisan to change the shape of the ceramic plate in Ogawa. The
examiner also takes “Official Notice” that it was well known to
drive piezoelectric devices in the radial direction [answer,
pages 4-5].
Appellant argues that Ogawa fails to teach that the
piezoelectric transformer is driven in a radial direction
expansion vibration basic mode or that the ceramic plate has an
outer shape of a disk as claimed. Appellant argues that the
examiner improperly relied on a per se rule of obviousness that a
change in shape is not patentable. Appellant also argues that
Ogawa does not teach the arrangement of inner and outer
electrodes as claimed [brief, page 7]. The examiner responds
that appellant has shown no unexpected results and that a change
in shape is not patentable. The examiner also notes that the
taking of “Official Notice” has become admitted prior art because
appellant did not seasonably traverse this position [answer,
pages 10-11]. Appellant reiterates his position that there is no
basis for the examiner’s holding that a change in shape is not
patentable. Appellant also responds that he challenged the
-8-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007