Appeal No. 95-5115
Application No. 08/091,999
Japanese ‘464, Japanese ‘870, Japanese ‘765 or Japanese ‘260
in view of Brown. Additionally, claims 1, 4 through 6 and 8
are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Kubota in view of Brown . 3
None of the above noted rejections can be sustained.
As correctly explained by the appellants, the Brown,
Otsuka and Kubota references contain no teaching or suggestion
of the here claimed silica to polymer weight ratios. While
Otsuka and Kubota teach adding silica to a polymer-based
protective layer in order to improve the strength
characteristics thereof, the appellants teach adding silica to
their polymer-based barrier layer in order to improve entirely
different characteristics. On the record before us, the
examiner has advanced no evidence or rationale to support a
conclusion that the amount of silica needed to obtain the
characteristics of the prior art would correspond to the
amount of silica needed to obtain the entirely different
characteristics of the here claimed invention. It follows
3The multiplicity of alternative rejections formulated
by the examiner and his SPE are contrary to the guidelines set
forth in the Manuel of Patent Examining Procedure (M.P.E.P.) §
706.02 (July 1998).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007