Appeal No. 2005-2140
Application No. 09/943,355
equivalent to the lamps shown in Figure 10. For the location of
the erasing light, the examiner turns to Arakawa, stating
(Answer, page 4) that
Arakawa shows that a sheet-shaped erasing light source
30 located in close vicinity to the stimulable phosphor
sheet 20 and on a side of the one surface of the sheet
supported at the position for image recording (of
object 50) which is exposed to the radiation and
furthermore irradiating erasing light to an entire area
of the sheet 20 is known. . . . The sheet-shaped
erasing light source 30 of Arakawa is plainly more
compact than the bulky sources 261 of Saotome, and uses
the exact technology identified by Saotome eta al. as
equivalent thereto, so it would have been obvious to
one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
invention was made to modify the apparatus of Saotome
to comprise a sheet-shaped source erasing light in the
location suggested by Arakawa since a smaller case 229
could be achieved that way.
Appellant argues (Brief, page 6) that the skilled artisan
would not have been motivated to combine Arakawa with Saotome II
because Arakawa's electroluminescent panel does not erase the
energy completely from the phosphor sheet and, thus, differs from
the erasing light of Saotome II. Further, appellant contends
(Brief, page 3) that neither Saotome II nor Arakawa suggests that
replacing Saotome II's light sources in Figure 10 with an EL
plate would reduce the size of the apparatus. We agree that
there is no reason to combine the two references. The examiner's
reason for combining is not supported by either reference.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007