Appeal No. 1998-2309 Page 12 Application No. 08/277,035 Swartz discloses the resultant film to have utility in a pyroelectric detector (col. 8, line 43). We find no suggestion in Swartz of using the resultant film having varying Ba/Sr stoichiometry throughout the thickness of the film, in a thin film capacitor as claimed. From all of the above, we find that Swartz does not anticipate claim 14. In addition, from the disclosure of Swartz, we find no suggestion, and no persuasive reasoning has been provided by the examiner, that would have suggested to an artisan the steps of "providing a liquid precursor comprising barium, strontium, and titanium together in a common solution, depositing said precursor directly on said first metal electrode to form a thin film" as recited in claim 14. In sum, we find that Swartz neither anticipates not renders obvious the method recited in claim 14. Independent claim 17 contains language identical to claim 14 with respect to providing and depositing the precursor. With regard to independent claim 21, we find that the claim has language identical to claim 14 with respect to the providing and depositing of the liquid precursor, with the exception that claim 21 does not recite that the precursor isPage: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007