Appeal No. 1997-3528
Application No. 08/230,659
index grating. Nor does Bjorklund describe the irradiation
times for measuring the photoconductivity of the article.
Walsh describes the use of two-beam coupling to study the
grating properties, as a function of electric field, of a
particular photorefractive polymer, i.e. nonlinear epoxy
polymer bis-phenol-A-diglycidyl ether 4-nitro-1,2-
phenylenediamine, doped with 30 wt.% of diethylamino-
benzaldehyde diphenylhydrazone. (Page 1642.) However, Walsh
does not make up for the difference between the appellants’
claimed invention and Bjorklund. It is not clear to us how
the measurement of grating properties as described in Walsh is
relevant to the measurement of photoconductivity as described
in Bjorklund. In short, there is no teaching, suggestion, or
motivation in Walsh to carry out Bjorklund’s photoconductivity
measurements for a time sufficient to meet the radiation
intensity and absorbed energy/unit volume limitations of
appealed claim 11.
We therefore hold that the collective teachings of
Bjorklund and Walsh also do not establish a prima facie case
of obviousness against the subject matter of appealed claim
11. Since appealed claims 12, 14, and 17 through 20 all
13
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007