Appeal No. 2002-1301
Application No. 09/233,983
Arimoto should be controlled based on a frequency characteristic
of the transducer in Arimoto. Since Ishida does not control
light in any form, there is no basis to use any frequency
characteristics, which might be suggested in Ishida, as a basis
to control an illumination means of the type disclosed in
Arimoto.
With respect to independent claim 8, the examiner cites
Arimoto as teaching the claimed invention except for changing the
amount of time for accumulating an amount of light at the
transducer according to a frequency characteristic and a
saturation characteristic of the transducer unit. The examiner
cites Ishida as teaching that the proper outputs of a transducer
would change according to a frequency characteristic of the
transducer. The examiner finds that it would have been obvious
to the artisan to modify the light controlling method of Arimoto
by having the controlling means change the time for accumulating
an amount of light at the transducer according to a frequency
characteristic and saturation characteristic of the transducer as
taught by Ishida [answer, pages 5-7].
Appellant argues that contrary to the examiner’s
assertion, Ishida fails to disclose or suggest controlling a time
for accumulating an amount of light at the change unit according
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007