Appeal No. 1997-2859
Application 08/340,676
bandwidth [Kratz, col. 1, lines 30 to 36]. We also find that
Hilton, at col. 3, lines 38-40, teaches the use of anti-
reflective coating applied directly to the surface of the
silicon layer 11. Thus, the Examiner’s suggested combination
of Hilton and Kraatz to meet claim 17 is proper and we affirm
the rejection.
In conclusion, we have affirmed the decision of the
Examiner rejecting claims 15 to 20 and 22 to 24.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
JAMES D. THOMAS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
ERROL A. KRASS ) BOARD OF
PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
-12-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007