Appeal No. 2003-0121
Application No. 09/143,318
Saeki et al. (Saeki) 5,053,669 Oct. 1, 1991
Kawai et al. (Kawai) 5,172,023 Dec. 15, 1992
Miyazawa et al. (Miyazawa) 5,247,220 Sep. 21, 1993
Suzuki et al. (Suzuki) 5,770,912 Jun. 23, 1998
(filed Mar. 6, 1996)
Iino et al. (Iino) 5,780,955 Jul. 14, 1998
(filed Sep. 30, 1996)
Claims 1-8 and 10-21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over any one of Miyazawa, Iino, or Suzuki in view of
any one of Saeki, Tokusima or Kawai.
Reference is made to the briefs and answer for the
respective positions of appellants and the examiner.
OPINION
Without identifying any specific portions of the references,
the examiner alleges that each of Miyazawa, Iino and Suzuki
teaches a self-excited vibration motor including a rotor, a
stator base, a pressing means and a drive circuit, but does not
teach the provision of electrical insulation. The examiner turns
to Saeki, Tokusima and Kawai and alleges that each one of these
references teaches that it was “known to provide piezoelectric
ultrasonic motors with various parts formed of insulating
material, including rotors, stators and pressing members”
(answer-page 3). The examiner then concludes that it would have
been obvious “to provide parts of Miyazawa, lino (sic, Iino), or
-3–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007