Appeal No. 1997-3303 Page 12
Application No. 08/171,126
(104) would have to be etched away in the region designed for the formation of a grating, which is
contrary to the teachings of Sakata. We therefore conclude that Sakata and Okai do not teach or
suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art the method of fabricating a laser structure set forth in claim 12.
Accordingly, as the examiner has failed to set forth a prima facie case of obviousness, we will reverse
the rejection of claim 12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. As claims 2-6, 8-11, and 13 depend from claim 12,
and the additional references relied upon by the examiner do not overcome the deficiencies of Sakata
and Okai, the rejections of claims 2-6, 8-11, and 13 are reversed.
CONCLUSION
The decision of the examiner to reject claims 2-6 and 8-13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103is reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007