Appeal No. 2001-1570
Application No. 09/081,393
Additionally, in contrast to the Examiner’s assertion and
different from the claimed monomorphs having bent tabs, the
disclosed spokes of Boutaghou are bent only when the bi-morph
elements are energized by an electrical potential and current
(column 6, lines 14-19). Furthermore, we find nothing in
Boutaghou that relates to the use of monomorphs formed of a
piezoelectric element attached to bent tabs of a metal sheet. In
fact, the Examiner has incorrectly identified bi-morph elements
44 attached to the sides of spoke 47 as two monomorphs, one on
each side of the spoke, that may be combined to produce a bi-
morph structure. Additionally, the Examiner’s reference to the
bent spokes that are deformed during the movement of the
actuator, falls short of the claimed “two monomorphs constructed
from a metal sheet having symmetrically bent tabs.” In that
regard, the spokes of Boutaghou, although bendable and deformable
by an electrical potential and current energizing the bi-morphs,
include neither the metal sheets nor any portions that are the
same as the claimed “bent tabs.” Accordingly, because the
claimed monomorphs on bent tabs is not taught by Boutaghou, the
prior art does not anticipate the claims and the 35 U.S.C. § 102
rejection of claims 1-8, 10-12, 14-17 and 21-30 cannot be
sustained.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007