Appeal No. 2003-0517
Application 08/899,848
fact that the projection is merely of a plurality of lines with
no specific requirement that the projected lines of light have
different intensities.
In considering the first stated rejection of independent
claims 1 and 6 on appeal as being obvious within 35 U.S.C. § 103
over Iwai in view of Cline, we find ourselves in general
agreement with the positions set forth by appellants as to these
claims in the principal brief on appeal. Notwithstanding the
examiner's urging at pages 3, 4, and 7 of the answer that the
discussion of Figure 1 at column 2 of Iwai teaches projecting a
plurality of lines of light across the edges of the metal sheets
1a, 1b, we agree with appellants' views first expressed at the
top of page 8 of the principal brief that the slit beam emitter
5a of Iwai's Figure 1 projects only a single beam of light and
not a plurality of lines of light as indicated by the examiner.
There is simply shown and taught the projection of a single slit
beam of light 8 in Figure 1 at column 2. The examiner, however,
is correct in indicating at the bottom of page 3 of the answer
that Iwai does not project light of differing intensities from
the light source laser 5. As Iwai applies to the critical
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007