Ex Parte Neumann et al - Page 2



          Appeal No. 2005-1194                                                        
          Application No. 10/110,115                                                  

                    12.   A measuring device for contactless detection of             
               an angle of rotation or a torsional rotation of a rotating             
               element (10), including a first resonator (2), a second                
               resonator (4), an exciter device (6), and a receiver device            
               (6), wherein the resonators (2, 4) have an essentially                 
               circular circumference, and there is at least one protrusion           
               and/or one recess on the essentially circular circumference,           
               wherein the resonators (2, 4) are coplanar to one another              
               and rotatable relative to one another, and at least one                
               resonator is connected to the rotating element (10).                   
               The reference relied on by the examiner is:                            
          Kishimoto                     6,084,416           Jul. 4, 2000              
               Claims 12 through 19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)           
          as being anticipated by Kishimoto.                                          
               Claim 20 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being             
          unpatentable over Kishimoto.                                                
               Reference is made to the final rejection, the brief and the            
          answer for the respective positions of the appellants and the               
          examiner.                                                                   
                                       OPINION                                        
               We have carefully considered the entire record before us,              
          and we will sustain the anticipation rejection of claims 12                 
          through 19, and sustain the obviousness rejection of claim 20.              
               Anticipation is established when a single prior art                    
          reference discloses, expressly or under the principles of                   
          inherency, each and every element of the claimed invention.  RCA            

                                          2                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007