Appeal No. 1997-3649 Page 6
Application No. 08/432,450
In re Dance, 160 F.3d 1339, 1343, 48 USPQ2d 1635, 1637 (Fed. Cir. 1998). “In other words, the
examiner must show reasons that the skilled artisan, confronted with the same problems as the inventor
and with no knowledge of the claimed invention, would select the elements from the cited prior art
references for combination in the manner claimed.” In re Rouffet, 149 F.3d 1350, 1357, 47 USPQ2d
1453, 1458 (Fed. Cir. 1998).
Fan describes a photosensitive printing element comprising a support, a photopolymerizable
layer and an infrared radiation sensitive layer which is infrared ablatable. However, Fan specifically
describes positioning a barrier layer between the photopolymerizable layer and infrared radiation
sensitive layer. It is the Examiner’s position that Fan teaches or suggests elimination of the barrier layer
or, in the alternative, that the barrier layer itself may be a photosensitive layer (Answer, pages 7-8).
Throughout Fan, the photosensitive element is characterized as including a barrier layer. See
col. 2, lines 13-31; col. 2, lines 55-58; col. 4, lines 11-13, the examples, and claim 1. Fan never
describes the barrier layer as optional. Furthermore, according to Fan, the barrier layer serves two
important functions. It minimizes the migration of materials between the photopolymerizable layer and
the infrared sensitive layer and it shields the photopolymerizable layer from atmospheric oxygen (col. 4,
lines 13-25).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007