Appeal No. 1998-2309 Page 12
Application No. 08/277,035
Swartz discloses the resultant film to have utility in a
pyroelectric detector (col. 8, line 43). We find no
suggestion in Swartz of using the resultant film having
varying Ba/Sr stoichiometry throughout the thickness of the
film, in a thin film capacitor as claimed.
From all of the above, we find that Swartz does not
anticipate claim 14. In addition, from the disclosure of
Swartz, we find no suggestion, and no persuasive reasoning has
been provided by the examiner, that would have suggested to an
artisan the steps of "providing a liquid precursor comprising
barium, strontium, and titanium together in a common solution,
depositing said precursor directly on said first metal
electrode to form a thin film" as recited in claim 14. In
sum, we find that Swartz neither anticipates not renders
obvious the method recited in claim 14. Independent claim 17
contains language identical to claim 14 with respect to
providing and depositing the precursor.
With regard to independent claim 21, we find that the
claim has language identical to claim 14 with respect to the
providing and depositing of the liquid precursor, with the
exception that claim 21 does not recite that the precursor is
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007