Appeal No. 1997-2628 Page 3
Application No. 08/383,713
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Dworsky 4,918,050 Apr. 17,
1990
Jack 4,962,316 Oct.
09, 1990
Higaki et al. (Higaki) 5,114,906 May 19,
1992
Claims 6-9, 11 and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as being unpatentable over Higaki in view of Dworsky or
Jack.
OPINION
Upon careful consideration of the opposing arguments
presented on appeal, we concur with appellants that the
applied prior art fails to establish a prima facie case of
obviousness of the claimed subject matter. Accordingly, we
will not sustain the examiner's stated rejection.
At page 5 of the answer, the examiner states:
[i]t is the examiner’s position that while Higaki
does not show that the superconductor thin film is
deposited on both sides of the substrate, however,
it is considered that such two sides deposition is
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art since
Higaki in column 1, lines 35-37, shows that his
method can be utilized in many applications which
can be a microwave component, and the secondary
references clearly show that microwave components
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007