Appeal No. 95-3312
Application 08/167,437
of Gurvitch, Morris and Ray.
OPINION
We have carefully considered all of the arguments
advanced by appellants and the examiner and agree with
appellants that the aforementioned rejections are not well
founded. Accordingly, these rejections will be reversed.
The examiner argues that Lee teaches that it was known to
use a buffer layer of an insulating material such as zirconium
oxide between a superconducting layer and the supporting
substrate (answer, page 4). We do not find in Lee any
indication that the disclosed zirconium oxide is merely an
example of a larger class of suitable buffer layer materials
as asserted by the examiner. Lee does not disclose use of any
buffer layer material other than zirconium oxide.
Also, Lee does not teach that a buffer layer is needed
between a superconducting layer and the particular substrate
materials recited in appellants’ claims. The examiner argues
that appellants’ disclosure indicates that a buffer layer used
for a silicon substrate may also be formed between other
semiconductor substrates and a superconducting film (answer,
4-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007