Appeal No. 2004-0381
Application No. 09/924,267
Arai only discloses possible thicknesses for the electrode.
Arai does not disclose possible thicknesses for the copper lead.
Substitution of the copper lead with the carbon tracks of the
secondary references would result in an unknown total thickness.
Appellants’ claim 10 requires that the thin working layer
of the electrode has a thickness of from 2 to 10 microns, such
that the electrode has a response slope that remains
substantially constant as the thickness of the thin working
layer decreases.
The examiner has not explained how the total thickness of
Arai (copper lead thickness (whether substituted or not) +
electrode thickness) falls within the claimed range of 2 to 10
microns. Hence, the examiner’s assertion that the modified
sensor of Arai in view of Kawaguri and McAleer would be
structurally identical is not supported by the facts before us,
nor by any explanation provided by the examiner. Therefore, the
examiner’s theory of inherency based upon structural
identicalness fails.
Furthermore, the examiner has not explained how any of the
other applied references of record cure the aforementioned
deficiencies of Arai.
Therefore, in view of the above, we reverse each of the
35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections.
III. Conclusion
The rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph is
affirmed.
Each of the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections is reversed.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007