Appeal No. 1998-0688
Application 08/274,158
of less than 1%. Appellant’s declaration of April 15, 1996
filed under 37 C.F.R.
§ 1.132 provides support for such assertion. Appellant adds
that Hosaka’s “paint having a small reflectance” does not
provide a grey surface having a relative intensity of
irregularly reflected light of N4 to N8.5 as recited in claim
1. Appellant further points out that a “paint having a small
reflectance” could be any paint and not necessarily a
substantially achromatic paint. Additionally, Appellant on
page 5 of the reply brief concludes that rather than how
Hosaka’s disclosure can be reasonably interpreted, one must
look at whether a person skilled in the art would understand a
“small reflectance” to be less than 1%.
The Examiner on page 14 of the answer responds to
Appellant’s arguments by stating that Appellant’s position
with regard to the reflectance of Hosaka’s document cover
surface, as stated in the declaration, is not conclusive of
lack of such teaching. The Examiner further states that the
disclosure of Hosaka can be reasonably interpreted to include
a document covering surface having a reflectance of greater
than 1%. The Examiner on page 19 of the supplemental answer
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007