Appeal No. 2004-0024
Application No. 09/249,922 Page 6
to replace the ignition control of Gaus with a microprocessor
because the microprocessor operates according to a program stored
in memory and can be tailored to suit the application. The
examiner further asserts (answer, page 5) that metal halide lamps
are capable of producing white light and that white light is
inherently capable of penetrating a dense fog.
Appellants assert (brief, page 4) that the lamps of Gaus and
Cockram have completely different operating characteristics, and
questions why an artisan looking to improve a metal halide lamp
would look to a gas discharge lamp. Appellants (id.) note that
Gaus was filed five years after Cockram was published, and assert
that if a microprocessor was equivalent to the control circuitry
of Gaus, that Gaus would have at least mentioned that a
microprocessor could be substituted for the control circuitry.
It is further argued (brief, page 5) that the claimed flashlight
must produce white light capable of penetrating dense smoke and
fog, and that this element is not disclosed in either reference.
Appellants contend (id.) that the examiner's assertion of
inherency is unsubstantiated in the prior art.
Before addressing the examiner's rejections based upon prior
art, it is an essential prerequisite that the claimed subject
matter be fully understood. Analysis of whether a claim is
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007