Appeal No. 1997-3420
Application No. 08/371,227
teaching, suggestion or inference in the prior art as a whole
or from the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary
skill in the art and not from the appellant's disclosure.
See, for example, Uniroyal ,Inc. v. Rudkin-Wiley Corp., 837
F.2d 1044, 1052, 5 USPQ2d 1434, 1439 (Fed. Cir.), cert.
denied, 488 U.S. 825 (1988).
The appellants’ invention relates to improving the manner
in which thin film layers are deposited upon the surface of
optical discs that are used in recording audio or video
information. As part of the process of magnetron sputtering
that is used is coat the surface of these discs while they are
on a holding means, it is known to provide center and outer
peripheral masks to shield, respectively, the center and the
outer periphery of the disc substrate. Features of the
appellants’ invention that are recited in independent claim 4
include insulating the center mask from the target cooling
means upon which it is mounted, making the peripheral mask
independent of the center mask, and anodizing the center mask
by virtue of its contact with an anodic substrate holding
means during sputtering. The examiner has assembled five
references which, when taken collectively, in the examiner’s
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007