Ex parte MITZINGER - Page 2




          Appeal No. 95-3088                                                          
          Application 08/059,983                                                      



                    1.  A method for processing exposed photographic                  
          reversal silver halide materials comprising the following steps:            
          (a) first development, (b) reversal bath, (c) color development,            
          (d) conditioning, (e) bleaching, (f) fixing, (g) washing, (h)               
          stabilization and (i) drying, characterized in that hydroquinone            
          sulfonic acid is used as the first developer, and no washing                
          takes place between steps (a) and (b) and step (b) is carried out           
          in countercurrent over at least 2 stages.                                   

               The references relied on by the examiner are:                          

          Kishimoto                     4,752,556      Jun. 21, 1988                  
          Kojima et al. (Kojima)        4,948,711      Aug. 14, 1990                  
          Wernicke et al. (Wernicke)    5,110,715      May   5, 1992                  

               Claim 1 stands rejected under 35 USC § 103 as unpatentable             
          over the known prior art E-6 process in view of Wernicke and                
          Kojima.  Claim 2 stands rejected under 35 USC § 103 as                      
          unpatentable over the known prior art E-6 process in view of                
          Wernicke and Kojima, and further in view of Kishimoto.                      
               We have carefully considered the entire record, including              
          the appellant's position as set forth in the brief and the                  
          examiner's position as set forth in the answer, and we have                 
          decided that we will not sustain the examiner's rejection.  Since           
          we are in substantial agreement with appellant's position as set            
          forth in the brief, we adopt that position as our own.                      
               The examiner has not established a prima facie case of                 

                                          2                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007