Appeal No. 2006-0378 2
Application No. 10/052,703
INTRODUCTION
The Examiner rejects the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). As evidence of
unpatentability, the Examiner relies upon the following prior art references:
Chen et al. (Chen) US 4,534,816 Aug. 13, 1985
Sato US 6,120.605 Sep. 19, 2000
The specific rejections maintained are:
1. Claims 1-9, 12, 14, 15, 19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
as anticipated by Chen; and
2. Claims 10, 11, 13, 16-18, and 20-37 rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Chen in view of Sato.
Substantially for the reasons provided by Appellants in
their Brief, we reverse. We add the following primarily for
emphasis.
OPINION
With regard to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b), there
are two independent claims subject to this rejection, claims 1
and 9. The issues presented by claim 9 are different from the
issues presented by claim 1. We will, therefore, address claim 9
separately.
We consider the issues presented by claim 1 first. Claim 1
is directed to a shower head having a cooling system comprising a
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007