Appeal No. 95-4830
Application 07/899,361
For the above reasons, we conclude that the examiner has
not carried her burden of establishing a prima facie case of
obviousness of appellants’ claimed invention. The rejection
of appellants’ claims 1 and 2 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over
Suzuki therefore is reversed.
Under the provisions of 37 CFR § 1.196(b), we enter the
following new ground of rejection.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over
Suzuki in view of Hopf.
Suzuki discloses a liquid crystal compound (col. 7, lines
37-43) which differs from that recited in appellants’ claim 1
only in that the terminal ester radical shown at the left in
Suzuki’s compound is alkoxycarbonyl, whereas that in
appellants’ claim 1 is alkanoyloxy. However, Hopf discloses a
liquid crystal compound of the formula R -Q -A-(Q ) -R , wherein1 1 2 2
q
R can be, inter alia, an alkanoyloxy group (R-COO-) or an1
alkoxycarbonyl group (R-OCO-) having 1 to 15 carbon atoms, Q1
o o o o
can be, inter alia, A -Z where A is 1,4-phenylene and Z is
-5-5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007