Appeal No. 2005-2760
Application 09/915,963
published work, that the subject matter therein has been reviewed
by legitimate authorities on the subject, the cited website, with
its seemingly reasonable explanations, appears to offer some
evidence tending to show the correctness of appellants’ position.
Moreover, the examiner’s response, see infra, to appellants’
argument appears to agree that a “fast wave” is a traveling wave
having a velocity greater than the speed of light. Thus, the
cited claim recitation does not defy the “conventional theory of
physics,” by the examiner’s own admission.
It appears to us that appellants have provided a reasonable
explanation and evidence to doubt the examiner’s general
statement of a phase velocity “greater than the speed of light”
somehow defying a conventional theory of physics. The examiner
has not advanced any evidence or an acceptable line of reasoning
inconsistent with enablement, in view of the evidence submitted
by appellant and, therefore, has not sustained his burden.
The examiner responds to appellant’s evidence, at pages 6-7
of the answer, by arguing whether waves are “fast” or “slow” and
whether the plane wave is in “free space” or not. The examiner
then concludes by stating that claims 2 and 12 “need to meet two
criteria one is the traveling wave is the fast wave, and the
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007