Appeal No. 1999-2435 4
Application No. 08/872,876
discloses that the flow of gas from the inlet tube A to the outlet tube B, “generates a
condition of reduced pressure at the upper ends of suction tubes C, in accordance with
Bernoulli’s theorem, and therefore partially evacuates the space between the overcladding
tube 44 and the primary optical fiber preform 46.” See Figure 6A and specification, page
14, lines 9-11. It is evident that the claimed invention requires “generating a condition of
reduced pressure . . . in response to said flow of gas,” as required by claim 1.
In contrast, it is the examiner’s position in applying the Hicks reference that, “13 is
the inlet; the gas removed (via 13a) from the enjoiner is flow of gas that goes through the
inlet 13; it is inherent that the flow is supplied to something (perhaps a vacuum pump). It
is noted that ‘inlet’ merely describes an opening and not a direction through which a fluid
enters (e.g.[,] an inlet to a lagoon has [a] flow in either direction - depending upon the
tide).” See Final Rejection, page 4. We disagree.
One critical limitation of the claimed subject matter requires, “supplying a flow of
gas through an inlet; generating a condition of reduced pressure within a predetermined
region of said adjoiner as compared to an external pressure of said adjoiner, in response to
said flow of gas.”
The term, “inlet” is defined in part, as “a way of entering,” or “an opening for
intake.”1 We find that Hicks discloses that, “a vacuum line 13a is connected to the
1 Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, p. 623 (Merriam-Webster Inc., Springfield, MA,
1986). Copy attached.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007