Appeal No. 2005-0070
Application No. 09/885,102
operation" (page 3 of Brief, second paragraph). Appellants
maintain that "the concentration of ozone generated is greatly
improved" due to the direction of gas flow through the generator
(id.).
The appealed claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as
follows:
(a) claims 13 and 14 over Shinjo;
(b) claims 13, 14 and 18 over Kamiya;
(c) claim 13 over Duarte; and
(d) claims 13 and 14 over JP '627.
Also, the appealed claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
follows:
(e) claims 17, 19 and 21 over Shinjo;
(f) claims 17 and 19-21 over Kamiya; and
(g) claims 16 and 22 over Shinjo and JP '627 in view of
Ishioka.
We have thoroughly reviewed the respective positions
advanced by appellants and the examiner. As a result, we are in
agreement with appellants that the examiner has failed to
establish a prima facie case of anticipation under § 102 and a
prima facie case of obviousness under § 103 for the claimed
subject matter on appeal. Accordingly, for essentially those
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007