Appeal No. 95-3865
Application 07/714,568
Jain et al. (Jain) 4,863,827 Sep. 5, 1989
Claims 6-8, 12-20, 22, 26 and 27 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Jain in view of Uehara and
Nishioka. We reverse this rejection. Appellants’ arguments in2
the brief and reply brief, and the examiner’s response in the
answer and supplemental answer, have been thoroughly considered
in reaching our decision, and are discussed as appropriate below.
OPINION
Claim 26 on appeal recites a presensitized plate with the
following requirements: (1) a roughened and anodized aluminum
support; (2) two positive working light-sensitive layers; (3) one
layer adjacent to or near the support comprising an ester
obtained by reacting 1,2-naphthoquinone-2-diazide-5-sulfonyl
chloride with a polyhydroxy compound, and an alkali-soluble
resin; and (4) the other light-sensitive layer comprising an
ester obtained by reacting 1,2-naphthoquinone-2-diazide-5-
2 The Advisory Action dated March 18, 1994, states that the amendment will
be entered upon appeal and that the rejection under § 103 will be maintained.
However, this action does not state the status of the two rejections under 35
U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, that were present in the final rejection dated
Nov. 2, 1993 (see footnote 1 on page 4 of the main brief). Since these
rejections under § 112 were not repeated in the Examiner’s Answer, we treat them
as having been dropped and thus do not consider them for purposes of this appeal.
See MPEP § 1208, page 1200-15 (Rev. 3, July 1997).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007