Appeal No. 1997-4093
Application No. 08/115,209
a basis had been established, the appellants have adequately
demonstrated that the disclosed and claimed invention would
have been adequately enabled by the admitted prior art.
Accordingly, the lack of enablement rejection of claims 1
through 6 and 10 is reversed.
Turning lastly to the prior art rejection of claims 1
through 6 and 10, the examiner is of the opinion that it would
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to store
the noted prior art color density information of the preamble
(and correspondingly of the references to Fursich and Thurm)
for films of specific types for future use so that “printing
may be carried out with high processing capabilities” (final
rejection, pages 5 through 7).
Appellants have acknowledged (Brief, page 9) that:
The apparatus and method for forming color density
difference curves is fully described in the prior
art Thurm et al. and Fursich et al. references.
Indeed, the drawing in this case is the same as one
of the drawings in the Fursich et al. patent . . . .
The conventional features of this application are
illustrated in the drawing in the form of labeled
rectangular boxes 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9.
Appellants go on to state (Brief, page 11) that “[t]he
specification of this application expressly identified Thurm
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007