Appeal No. 1999-2335
Application No. 08/449,809
Turner system by replacing the solid heat radiating shelves
with the open heat absorbing shelves of Yamabe. First, there
is no explicit teaching or indication that it would be
advantageous to utilize open shelves in the Turner system.
Second, replacing Turner’s solid heat-radiating shelves with
Yamabe’s open shelves would result in uneven heating of the
substrates in the Turner continuous process system because the
masses on peripheries of the open shelves would unnecessarily
absorb heat. Thus, the even heating provided by the solid
shelves in the Turner system would be compromised, which would
have been a disincentive to one of ordinary skill in the art
to make the proposed substitution.
We therefore conclude that the combined teachings of
Turner and Yamabe fail to establish a prima facie of
obviousness with regard to the subject matter of independent
claims 1, 10, 14, 18 and 19, and we will not sustain the
rejection of these claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 or, it
follows, the claims dependent thereon.
Upon rehearing, our prior decision is modified as
follows:
The examiner’s rejection of claims 1-7 and 9-22 under 35
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007