Appeal No. 1997-1530
Application 08/485,198
addressing the claimed structure, no adhering insulating
layers exist in the infrared detector disclosure of Hornbeck.
As a final commentary, we have reviewed the Watanabe
reference offered by the Examiner in combination with Hornbeck
as the basis for the obvious rejection. We find nothing in
Watanabe which adds to the disclosure of Hornbeck nor anything
which would overcome the deficiencies of Hornbeck discussed
supra. It is our view that, even assuming arguendo that the
references could be combined as suggested by the Examiner, any
resulting combination would fall well short of the specific
requirements set forth in the claims on appeal.
Since all of the claim limitations are not taught or
suggested by the applied prior art, it is our opinion that the
Examiner has not established a prima facie case of obviousness
with respect to the claims on appeal. Accordingly, we do not
sustain the Examiner’s 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of
independent
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007