Appeal No. 2003-1483
Application No. 09/591,661
tertiary mirrors 14 and 16 are arranged along a central axis 26
(col. 2, lines 41-54). Cook further offsets the field of view of
the tertiary mirror 14 to obtain images to the left of the
primary mirror 10 by 0.15° (col. 3, lines 65-68) while the field
of view of the tertiary mirror 16 is offset to the right of the
primary mirror 10 by 0.5° (col. 4,lines 3-8). Therefore, Cook
moves the images from each other and from the axis by offsetting
the field of view merely to insure complete separation of the two
images and their processing (col. 4, lines 9-19).
Therefore, we agree with Appellants (brief, pages 6-13) that
Cook’s changing the focal lengths and/or fields of view merely
facilitates generation of plural images and has nothing to do
with suppressing astigmatism. Therefore, one of ordinary skill
in the art would not have tilted or decentered the center of
curvature of the tertiary mirror in a direction of lesser
astigmatism merely because Cook separates the fields of view of
the two tertiary mirrors for forming different images. We also
find the Examiner’s reliance on the table in column 4 listing
decenter values for the tertiary mirrors 14 and 16, at best,
speculative since there is no clear explanation for the values
listed and whether they are decentered in a direction of lesser
astigmatism, as recited in claim 1.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007