Appeal No. 95-0331
Application No. 07/626,904
Further, patentee explicitly teaches using radiation having
wavelengths of 3900 Angstroms (see line 46 in column 9), and a
3900 Angstrom wavelength is applicable to both the longest
ultraviolet radiation wavelength and the shortest visible
radiation wavelength (e.g., see Hackh’s Chemical Dictionary,
3rd edition, page 716, copy attached).
Under these circumstances, we also will sustain the § 103
rejection of all appealed claims except for claims 10, 29, 78
and 84 as being unpatentable over Drahnak taken with Eckberg
in view of McDowell or Gruber or in view of only McDowell.
However, we cannot sustain the examiner’s § 103 rejection
of claims 10, 29, 78 and 84 “as being unpatentable over
Drahnak and Eckberg as applied to claims 9, 28, 77 and 83
above, and further in view of Boardman ‘169.” On the record
before us, the Boardman reference does not appear to be prior
art, and the examiner has offered utterly no exposition in
support of her implicitly-held contrary view. It follows that
the examiner has failed to carry her initial burden of
establishing a prima facie case of obviousness with respect to
the claims under consideration.
SUMMARY
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007