Appeal No. 96-2138
Application 07/967,607
The examiner's finding that McSweeney discloses "a blend of
an alkaline earth halophosphate with a mixture of phosphor"
(Final Rejection, page 2) is not clear. If the examiner intends
the "mixture of phosphors" to refer to phosphors other than the
halophosphate phosphors, as appears evident from the reference to
McSweeney, column 1, line 61, to column 2, line 9, the examiner's
finding is in error. The impression we get from the examiner's
rejections is that the examiner is interpreting the sentence
"[i]n accordance with other preferred embodiments, the blend [of
halophosphors] may include NH Cl, CaF , CaCl and mixtures4 2 2
thereof" (col. 2, lines 6-8), as suggesting a blend of
halophosphors with other phosphors. However, this is incorrect
since the halogen-containing constituents NH Cl, CaF , CaCl are4 2 2
not phosphors. If the examiner intends the "mixture of phosphor"
to refer to the mixture of halophosphate phosphors, the
examiner's finding is correct. However, in such case there is no
motivation in McSweeney or Northrop for adding a quad-phosphor
blend to an alkaline earth halophosphate phosphor blend. Since
McSweeney is interested in filling halogen vacancies there is no
motivation for substituting the quad-phosphor blend of Northrop
for the halogen-containing constituents. The examiner states
that "blending of these two phosphors will provide McSweeney's
fluorescent lamp to obtain an ultraviolet energy of wide spectrum
- 6 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007