Appeal No. 95-4857
Application 08/101,000
ranges (In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235
(CCPA 1955)), because there is no teaching in the prior art
reference (Johansen) that the variables here involved, i.e.,
layer thickness and thickness ratio, are "known to be result
effective." In order for a claimed parameter to be deemed5
the result of obvious experimentation, any such experi- menta-
tion must have come from within the teachings of the art. In
re Waymouth, 499 F.2d 1273, 1276, 182 USPQ 290, 292 (CCPA
1974). Johansen contains no such teachings.
Accordingly, the rejection of claim 1, and of claims
8 and 9 dependent thereon, will not be sustained. The rejec-
tion of
claims 4 to 7 will likewise not be sustained, since Press does
not supply the noted deficiencies of Johansen.
Rejections Pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(b)
The following rejections are made pursuant to 37 CFR
§ 1.196(b):
5 In re Boesch, 617 F.2d at 276, 205 USPQ at 219.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007