Ex Parte Adaeda et al - Page 14


              Appeal No. 2006-0859                                                                                           
              Application No. 09/778,338                                                                                     
                      We cite the De Filippis reference to show that it is known in the art to change a                      
              motor’s characteristics by placing a gap between the permanent magnets such that the                           
              magnets each occupy 120 magnetic electrical degrees.                                                           
                      We cite the Nakamura reference to show that it is known in the art that “[t]o                          
              decrease the eddy current loss of electrical steel sheets, the sheet thickness is reduced                      
              and the sheets are provided with an insulating film on the surface thereof.”                                   
                      We cite the Sakashita, Takahashi, and Acquaviva references to show that it is                          
              known in the art to change a motor’s characteristics by placing a gap between the                              
              permanent magnets (or by reducing the flux density between the poles).                                         


                                                       Conclusion                                                            
                      In view of the foregoing discussion, we have not sustained the rejection under                         
              35 U.S.C. § 112 of claims 7 and 9-11; and we have sustained the rejection under                                
              35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 1-7 and 9-11.                                                                        
                      We designate that part of our affirmation (claims 7 and 9-11) which includes                           
              newly cited prior art as a new ground of rejection under 37 CFR § 41.50(b) (2005).                             
                      37 CFR § 41.50(b) provides that, “[a] new grounds of rejection pursuant to this                        
              paragraph shall not be considered final for judicial review.”                                                  
                      37 CFR § 41.50(b) also provides that the Appellant, WITHIN TWO MONTHS                                  
              FROM THE DATE OF THE DECISION, must exercise one of the following two options                                  
              with respect to the new grounds of rejection to avoid termination of proceedings as to                         
              the rejected claims:                                                                                           




                                                             14                                                              



Page:  Previous  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007