Appeal No. 1996-2991
Application 08/302,931
As to dependent claim 17, the recitation therein is that
the particular mole percentage is recited for the boron oxide
to be “at least 2 mole %.” Although the boron mole % is not
recited in Farries, inasmuch as the actual recited amount in
dependent claim 17 is such a low value, any minor doping or
any doping at all in Farries obviously would have been at
least such a small amount. Appellants have not challenged the
examiner's observation at the top of page 11 of the answer
that it was well known in the art that normal doping would
have exceeded the claimed amount and since the claim only
requires the doping to be at least 2 %, we are persuaded of
the obviousness of the subject matter of claim 17 on appeal.
As a final matter with respect to appellants' arguments
in the brief and reply brief as to this rejection, appellants
have presented no evidence that the boron in Farries does not
contribute in some manner to the formation of the gratings
therein. In any event, we are in agreement with the
examiner's general observations at pages 9 and 10 of the
answer in response to the appellants' arguments as to this
rejection. No matter what may be the proper characterization
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007