Appeal No. 1998-3000
Application No. 08/485,412
of Jensen.
Claims 11 and 16 stand rejected 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Schoch, Tanaka, Herndon and Jensen in
further view of Mihara.
Reference is made to the brief and the answer for the
respective positions of the appellants and the examiner.
OPINION
The obviousness rejection of claims 2 through 18, 20
through 22, 24 through 29, 51, 55 through 58, 70, 73, 74, 76,
101 through 103 and 112 through 120 is reversed.
According to the examiner (Answer, page 5), “Schoch
teaches several polymers and explicitly uses ion irradiation
in the processing steps,” and “Tanaka, in column 1 lists
polymers and defines ‘radiation sensitive’ to mean ‘all high-
energy radiations including ultraviolet light, deep-
ultraviolet light, electron beams and X-rays.’” The examiner
concludes (Answer, page 5) that:
Therefore the polymers of Schoch are considered
radiation sensitive both in the broad sense and also
by the definition as used by Tanaka. For these
reasons, the claims are considered obvious either
over Schoch taken alone, or further considering
Tanaka’s definition of “radiation sensitive”.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007