Appeal No. 96-3652
Application No. 08/348,820
layer so as to suppress undesirable secondary reactions
accompanying their use (column 2, line 51 through column 3,
line 4). The examiner must identify a particularized
suggestion, reason or motivation to combine references or make
the proposed modification. See In re Rouffet, 149 F.3d 1350,
1359, 47 USPQ2d 1453, 1459 (Fed. Cir. 1998).
While we recognize that Yamazaki (column 5, line 59
through column 6, line 19) does suggest some advantages of the
use of a particular nozzle arrangement in forming a zinc
borosilicate glass film, there is no suggestion from the
collective applied prior art teachings that those same
advantages would accrue if the nozzle arrangement of Yamazaki
were used in the formation of the silica-based alkali barrier
layer of Mizuhashi. Moreover, we agree with appellants
(brief, pages 5 and 6) that Yamazaki teaches away from using a
nozzle that emits gas in a direction transverse to the
substrate.
In this regard, it is our view that even if the teachings
of Mizuhashi and Yamazaki were combinable, they would not have
rendered the claimed method prima facie obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007