Appeal No. 2004-0039
Application No. 09/740,324
moveable grating elements. This appealed subject matter is
adequately illustrated by independent method claim 37 which reads
as follows:
37. A method for processing light comprising steps for:
(a) directing the light to a first diffraction grating for
initial processing of the light by selecting a wavelength
range of interest; and
(b) directing the light to a second diffraction grating for
subsequent processing of the light by selecting at least
one wavelength within the wavelength range of interest,
with one of the first and second diffraction gratings
having a fixed spaced relationship of grating elements
therein, and with the other diffraction grating having
an electrically-variable spaced relationship of grating
elements therein wherein the grating elements are
electro-mechanically moveable.
The references set forth below are relied upon by the Examiner
as evidence of obviousness:
Ricco et al. (Ricco) 5,757,536 May 26, 1998
Mears et al. (Mears) 6,141,361 Oct. 31, 2000
All appealed claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Mears in view of Ricco.1
Rather than reiterate the respective positions advocated by
the Appellants and by the Examiner concerning the above noted
1 As indicated on page 4 of the brief, the claims on appeal
will stand or fall together. See 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7)(2002).
Accordingly, in assessing the merits of the rejection before us,
we will focus only on representative independent claim 37, with
which all other claims will stand or fall.
22
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007