Appeal No. 1996-1876
Application No. 08/344,663
evaluate the possibility of infringement and dominance. See
In re Hammack, 427 F.2d 1378, 1382 , 166 USPQ 204, 207-08
(CCPA 1970).
In the case before us, one would be at a loss to
determine whether a particular recording medium is covered by
the appealed claims, because the parameters of the light
absorptive layer of the recording medium (i.e., the claimed
refractive index and the claimed average thickness of the
absorptive layer) are defined and limited only by the
selection of a “reading laser beam” which is not part of the
claimed recording medium. For example, the applied Oba
reference describes or suggests a recording medium having a
structure identical to that claimed, in terms of the claimed
light transmitting substrate, the claimed light absorptive
layer, and the claimed light reflective layer. Generally, see
Oba at column 8, lines 49-58 and column 9, lines 2-18. When
using a cyanine dye as the light absorptive layer of Oba’s
recording medium, the real part of the complex refractive
index is 2.7. See the answer at page 4, the specification at
page 34, and the brief at page 6, lines 10-19. As taught by
Oba at column 8, lines 35-37, this layer may have a thickness
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007