Appeal No. 2004-0612
Application No. 09/531,660
The appellant argues that Kuwabara’s “Soller slits are not
removably insertable in the X-ray path as required by the present
invention and thus do not read on independent claims 1 and 5"
(reply brief, page 5). This limitation is not in claim 5.
For the above reasons we affirm the rejection of claim 5 and
claims 6-9 that stand or fall therewith.
DECISION
The rejection of claims 1 and 5-7 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
over Kuwabara is reversed as to claim 1 and affirmed as to
claims 5-7. The rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 2
and 8 over Kuwabara is reversed as to claim 2 and affirmed as to
claim 8. The rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 3 and 9
over Kuwabara in view of Kumakhov is reversed as to claim 3 and
affirmed as to claim 9. The rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of
claim 4 over Kuwabara in view of Cash is reversed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007