Appeal No. 1998-0996
Application No. 08/498,385
cure the deficiencies of Inaba discussed supra, and we cannot
sustain the obviousness rejection of claims 3 through 5, 9, 14
through 17 and 22 through 25.
Claim 10 depends from claim 9 and further recites specific
materials for the ultraviolet ray shading material. The examiner
(Answer, pages 8-9) cites Kirk-Othmer's section on UV stabilizers
asserting that it would have been obvious "to provide the disc
cartridge holder of Inaba '642 with an ultraviolet shading
material being selected from the . . . [claimed] compounds as
shown by 'Ultraviolet Absorbers' in order to avoided [sic] the
degradation of a polymer compound of which the absorber is a
part."
Although Kirk-Othmer does teach that sunlight and other
sources of ultraviolet light degrade polymers and light sensitive
materials, the examiner has not established that the disc holders
of Inaba (which are made of synthetic resin) are exposed to such
radiation and would, therefore, require protection from such
radiation. Furthermore, the examiner has failed to explain why
the skilled artisan would have selected the particular compounds
claimed. Merely that Kirk-Othmer discloses that such materials
may be used for ultraviolet filtering is insufficient motivation
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007