Appeal No. 1998-1660
Application No. 08/108,499
well as disclosing structure which is capable of performing
the recited functional limitations. RCA Corp. v. Applied
Digital Data Systems, Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385,
388 (Fed. Cir.); cert. dismissed, 468 U.S. 1228 (1984); W.L.
Gore and Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540,
1554, 220 USPQ 303, 313 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469
U.S. 851 (1984).
With respect to independent claims 11 and 12, the
Examiner attempts (Answer, pages 5 and 6) to read the various
claim limitations on the Ghandhi reference. In particular,
the Examiner points to the disclosure at page 87 of Ghandhi
which suggests a particular range of melt temperature
variation during crystal growth. In the Examiner’s line of
reasoning, this temperature control criteria will inherently
produce a GaAs crystal which would satisfy the particular
claimed silicon atom density and lattice constant inequality
relationship requirement.
After reviewing the disclosure of Ghandhi in light of the
arguments of Appellants and the Examiner, we are in agreement
with Appellants that the Examiner’s conclusion of inherency is
lacking of any support on the record. To establish inherency,
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007