Appeal No. 1997-4321
Application No. 08/050,693
Appealed claims 11-15 and 17 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Wang.1
We have thoroughly reviewed each of appellants' arguments
for patentability. However, we are in full agreement with the
examiner that the subject matter defined by appealed claim 11,
with which all the appealed claims stand or fall, would have
been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art within the
meaning of § 103 in view of the Wang disclosure. Accordingly,
we will sustain the examiner's rejection for essentially those
reasons expressed in the Answer, and we add the following
primarily for emphasis.
Appellants do not dispute that Wang discloses a
semiconductor material comprising ZnS and Mn, the composition
exemplified in the present specification, having a diameter of
less than 100 D. Appellants contend, however, that Wang
discloses a semiconductor alloy and "never suggests doping
rather than alloying a semiconductor material, and never
1The examiner misstates at page 3 of the Answer that
claim 10 stands rejected under § 103. However, page 1 of the
examiner's final rejection states that claim 10 is allowed and
claims 11 to 15 and 17 are rejected.
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007