Appeal No. 2003-1442
Application No. 09/359,037
appellants’ positions, and the final rejection and answer for the
examiner’s positions.
OPINION
As set forth below, we sustain the rejections under 35
U.S.C. § 102 of claims 12, 13, 15 through 17, 40, 42, 45, 48, 49
55 and 57. We also sustain the rejection of claims 14 and 46
under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The other claims on appeal not listed
here have their rejections reversed.
Turning to the first stated rejection of claims 1 through 7,
22, 39, 40, 44, 47, 54, and 55 as being anticipated by Deluca, we
sustain this rejection only as to claims 40 and 55.
Basically, we agree with appellants’ arguments presented in
the brief and reply brief as to this rejection as to independent
claims 1, 22, and 39 since each in some way recites that first
radiant energy is continuously used to illuminate the luminescent
material. The teaching in the background of Deluca at the bottom
of column 1, the use of the switching means 60 in the embodiment
shown in Figure 1 and our implicit understanding from the
embodiment shown in Figure 2 indicates to us that this reference
does not operate in such a manner that the luminescent material
is continuously illuminated by the so-called charging energy
beams associated with these embodiments. Each of the respective
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007