Appeal No. 2006-0595
Application No. 09/932,860
As correctly argued by appellants, the references relied
upon by the examiner fail to teach or suggest all of the claimed
limitations (Brief, page 6). Specifically, the combination of
references fail to teach or suggest a temperature sensing device
that is disposed between the layer of insulation and the
longitudinal body portion of the feedthrough device as required
by claim 1 on appeal (Brief, page 8; Reply Brief, page 5). As
correctly argued by appellants, Sajoto discloses a thermocouple
disposed externally to the radiation shield (i.e., insulation
layer)(Brief, page 10; see Sajoto, Figure 3A, thermocouple 66).2
The examiner relies on Fukuda for the teaching of a gas line
heating device for a gas conduit which includes a thermocouple
54a “positioned adjacent Fukuda’s gas line heater” (see the
Office action dated Jan. 10, 2005, page 7, citing Figure 5).
However, the temperature sensor 54a of Fukuda is disclosed and
shown as located in the conduit or introduction tube 11a (see
Figure 5 and col. 7, ll. 1-4; Brief, page 10). Accordingly, the
examiner has failed to establish why one of ordinary skill in
this art would have located the thermocouple or temperature
We note that Sajoto also suggests insertion of the2
thermocouple 66 in the heated gas delivery feedthrough 40 to
monitor the temperature (col. 6, ll. 39-41).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007