Appeal Number: 2006-1645
Application Number: 10/067,141
a microphone assembly which is removably detachable from a location between
said inhalation port and said air filter, said microphone assembly including a spacer for
separating said filter from said inhalation port, said spacer having a body with a passage
extending the entire length thereof through which filtered air may pass from said filter to
said inhalation port, said spacer further having a microphone extending therefrom;
an amplifier connected to said microphone for receiving and amplifying sound
transmitted by said microphone and outputting an amplified signal; and
a loudspeaker connected to said amplifier for receiving and radiating said
amplified signal.
No prior art references of record were relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims.
Claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph as including
language which is not supported by the specification as originally filed.
Reference is made to the Examiner's Answer (mailed June 3, 2005) for the
examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejection, and to appellants’ Brief (filed
April 21, 2003) and Supplemental Brief (filed October 2, 2003) for appellants’ arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the claims and the respective positions articulated
by appellants and the examiner. As a consequence of our review, we will reverse the
written description rejection of claims 1 through 20.
The examiner rejects claims 1 through 20 as including subject matter not
described in the original specification. Specifically, the examiner asserts (Answer, page
3) that the language “said spacer further having a microphone extending therefrom” and
“a microphone extending therefrom and into a clean air envelope of said face mask” lack
support in the original specification. The examiner explains (Answer, page 4) that
microphone 74 is shown in Figures 5 and 6 within the confines of spacer 50, not
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007