Ex parte BASIL et al. - Page 3




             Appeal No. 95-0808                                                                                   
             Application 08/048,866                                                                               


             is less than z and may be zero except when M is silicon; and                                         
                    b.    the reaction product of tetraalkylsilicate and                                          
             cerium oxide.                                                                                        




                                               THE REFERENCES                                                     
             Fujioka et al. (Fujioka)         4,405,679        Sep. 20,                                           
             1983                                                                                                 
             Basil et al. (Basil)             4,799,963        Jan. 24,                                           
             1989                                                                                                 
             H. Schroeder, “Oxide Layers Deposited from Organic Solutions”,                                       
             in 5 Physics of Thin Films 134-39 (G. Haas and R.E. Thun eds.,                                       
             Academic Press 1969).                                                                                
                                               THE REJECTIONS                                                     
                    Claims 1-10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as                                        
             being anticipated by Basil.  Claims 1-10 stand rejected under                                        
             35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over Fujioka in view of                                             
             Schroeder.  Claims 1-10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112,                                        
             first and second paragraphs, on the grounds that the claimed                                         
             invention is not described in such full, clear, concise and                                          
             exact terms as to enable a person of ordinary skill in the art                                       
             to make and use the invention, and for failing to particularly                                       
             point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which                                              


                                                      -3-3                                                        





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007