Appeal No. 1998-0754
Application No. 08/652,253
wherein the substrate is pretreated with an aqueous Sn free Pd sol which is stabilized with a water-
soluble polymer. In particular, appellants' claimed process of claims 5-9 and 20-23 would have been
obvious as Halliwell teaches appellants' plating process where any conventional sensitizer may be
employed and as the claimed sensitizers are known in the art as effective sensitizers that provide
improved bonding properties for metal plating.
Yet, while the examiner has established a prima facie case for appellants’ pretreatment of
electrically insulating substrates, the examiner has failed to establish such a case with respect to
claims 2-4 and 12-18 where the claims require the pretreatment of a glass substrate. In particular, De
Bakker teaches that glass, quartz, and glass ceramics are not activated by a polymer-stabilized Sn free
Pd sol sensitizer and as such metals will not plate on these surfaces even after treatment with the
sensitizer. (De Bakker, col. 2, line 56 to col. 3, line 2 and col. 3, lines 34-42). Indeed,
De Bakker teaches only those portions of a glass substrate which possess a metal, semiconductor or
polymer will be activated by the claimed Pd sol. Accordingly, while De Bakker teaches that metal,
metal oxides, semiconductors and polymer surfaces can be activated with the claimed Pd sol, De
Bakker fails to motivate one skilled in the art to treat a glass surface with the claimed aqueous Sn free
Pd sol.
Page 9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007