Appeal No. 2004-1087
Application No. 09/223,472
a single direction onto a printed circuit board and therefore
does not disclose having an outlet other than normal to the
surface so that the liquid flows rotationally over the surface
about the central axis.
The examiner responds on pages 9-11 of the answer. The
examiner refers to appellants’ specification for guidance as to
the interpretation of the limitation “flows rotationally.” The
examiner correctly points out that the phrase “flows
rotationally” is not specifically set forth in the
specification. Answer, page 10.
On page 11 of the answer, the examiner states that in view
of the disclosure in the paragraph bridging pages 5-6 of the
specification, and as depicted in Figures 1e and 1f of
appellants’ specification, when the specification states that
the liquid flow 70 “rotates”, this includes localized swirling
motion, because, as shown in Figure 1c, there are outlets
surrounding the central axis, and thus there will be localized
swirling or rotation about the central axis. In this same way,
the examiner states that the plurality of nozzles of Eidschun,
which are positioned at all sides of the central axis of the
circuit boards, would produce localized swirling or rotation
about the central axis. Appellants do not dispute this
interpretation of the motion of localized swirling explained by
the examiner. Appellants also do not dispute that Eidschun
cannot produce such a localized swirling as described by the
examiner. Hence, based upon the examiner’s findings, we affirm
the rejection.
V. The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection over Eidschun
This rejection involves claims 21 and 28 which are
dependent upon claims 1 or 18, and therefore fall with claims 1
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007