Appeal No. 2002-2340
Application 08/886,666
for illuminating a viewing area adjacent said instrument,
said light delivery system being shaped to conform to the
general shape of said instrument, said light delivery system
comprising light distribution means for receiving light from
an associated light source and propagating light therethrough
via internal reflection, and light emitter means extending
lengthwise along said instrument, said light emitter means
receiving light propagated by said light distribution means
and emitting light along a portion of the length of said light
emitter means for illuminating a viewing area in proximity of
said instrument.
The following references are relied on by the examiner:
Wunsch et al. (Wunsch) 3,890,960 June 24, 1975
Mori 4,471,412 Sep. 11, 1984
Brody et al. (Brody) 4,597,030 June 24, 1986
Pristash et al. (Pristash) 5,136,480 Aug. 4, 1992
Claims 77 and 137 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
as being anticipated by Wunsch. The examiner's reliance upon
this reference is extended to claims 95, 96, 98, 101, 133 and
136 with further reliance upon Mori in rejections under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103. As to claim 101, the examiner also specifically relies
upon In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Lastly, claims 77-85, 93, 94, 108, 119, 131 and 132 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103. As evidence of obviousness,
the examiner relies upon Brody in view of Pristash.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007