Ex parte SCOTT et al. - Page 15

          Appeal No. 96-1931                                                           
          Application 07/995,635                                                       

          We reject claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. '  102(b) as being                         
          anticipated by the disclosure of Agostinelli, which reference was            
          newly cited in the examiner=s answer as noted above.  Example 1              
          of Agostinelli teaches a polished quartz substrate having a thin             
          film of zirconia (ZrO2) produced thereon.  The zirconia film is              
          indicated as being transparent [column 20, line 36].  Example 5              
          of Agostinelli teaches that the substrate could be made from                 
          polycrystalline alumina [column 21, lines 54-55].  The invention             
          as broadly recited in claim 1 is fully met by the article de-                
          scribed in example 5 of Agostinelli.                                         
          We note that appellants indicate that Agostinelli is a                       
          reference under 35 U.S.C. '  102(e), and that they will antedate             
          the reference if it is actually applied in a rejection [reply                
          brief, pages 1-2].  If this point were correct, we might be                  
          inclined to let the examiner decide if the rejection should be               
          made.  It appears to us, however, that Agostinelli qualifies as              
          prior art under 35 U.S.C. '  102(b).  The filing date of the                 
          application is December 18, 1992.  The issue date of Agostinelli             
          is May 21, 1991.  Since May 21, 1991 is more than one year before            


Page:  Previous  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007