Appeal No. 2001-1336
Application No. 08/736,042
recording media passes through for generating signals that
control the transfer voltage.
In view of our analysis above, we find that the Examiner has
failed to set forth a prima facie case of obviousness as the
necessary teachings and suggestions related to the claimed sensor
for sensing the path of the recording media, as recited in
independent claims 1, 3, 5, 13 and 21, are not shown.
Accordingly, we do not sustain the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of
independent claims 1, 3, 5, 13 and 21, nor of claims 2, 4, 6 and
7 dependent thereon.
With respect to the rejection of claims 8-12 and 17-20, the
Examiner further relies on Kanno for teaching that the transfer
voltage should be increased for thick papers (answer, page 6).
However, Kanno provides no teaching related to the claimed
sensing unit along the path adjacent to a manual feeding tray and
fails to overcome the deficiencies of Kimura as discussed above
with respect to claim 1. Therefore, the 35 U.S.C. § 103
rejection of claims 8-12 and 17-20 cannot be sustained.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007