Appeal No. 2002-0816
Application No. 09/442,895 Page 20
arrangement and thus the FG coil, sufficiently far from the
stator field to effect isolation (col. 3, lines 45-48).
Accordingly, we find that the examiner has failed to establish a
prima facie case of obviousness of claim 16. The rejection of
claim 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is therefore reversed. We
reverse the rejection of claim 17 due to its dependency from
claim 16.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims
6-9 and 11-14 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, is
reversed. The decision of the examiner to reject claims 1-3, and
6-15 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is affirmed. The decision of the
examiner to reject claims 5, 16, and 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
is reversed.
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007