Appeal No. 95-3898
Application 08/156,953
columns 3 and 4 of Hoekje that there existed in the art the
preferred perovskite crystal structure materials and mixtures
thereof of those set forth in the generic formula in claim 1,
even as modified by dependent claims 2 and 3. This portion of
Hoekje even sets forth the preferred compound of SrRuO , the
3
same material the bulk of appellants’ own disclosure is
directed to. Indeed, in light of what was well known in the
art, even as represented by appellants’ own prior art
discussion as well as that in Lichtenberg, there were well
known thin film manufacturing processes. Overall, the
collective teachings of both references clearly would have led
the artisan to a relatively limited number of possibilities
utilizing conventional techniques with relatively specific
guidance.
The positions set forth by the examiner in the responsive
arguments portion of the answer appear to have addressed the
arguments presented by appellants in the brief as to the
rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Additionally, the weight of
the evidence from the teachings and suggestions of Hoekje and
Lichtenberg as well as the positions advocated by the examiner
in this portion of the answer lead us to conclude that thin
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007