Appeal No. 2002-0881
Application No. 09/169,071
THE REJECTIONS
The appealed claims stand rejected as follows:
(1) Claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over the
combined disclosures of Ochiai, Halko and Takahashi; and
(2) Claim 8 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over the
combined disclosures of Ochiai, Halko, Takahashi and Nakazawa.
OPINION
We have carefully reviewed the claims, specification and
applied prior art references, including all of the arguments
advanced by both the examiner and the appellants in support of
their respective positions. This review leads us to conclude
that the examiner’s Section 103 rejections are not well founded.
Accordingly, we reverse the examiner’s Section 103 rejections for
essentially those reasons set forth in the Brief. We only add
the following for emphasis and completeness.
Ochiai teaches an inkjet printhead having an outlet orifice
plate having a plurality of orifices for ejecting ink droplets
and a pressure chamber corresponding to the claimed means
defining a pumping cavity formed at least in part of a piezo
electric material. See Ochiai in its entirety. There is no
dispute that Ochiai is silent as the claimed cleaning station and
the claimed outlet orifice plate made of a material containing
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007