Appeal No. 1999-0056
Application No. 08/734,431
sensitivity by increasing the coupling of light into the
recording layer by optimizing the absorbance of the recording
layer by optimizing both the dye concentration and thickness
of the recording layer based upon the teachings of Howe et al.
'306 to do so" (page 5 of Answer, last paragraph).
While the examiner's position seems reasonable in the
first instance, particularly regarding the obviousness of
optimizing the thickness of the recording layer based on the
teachings of Howe, we find that the examiner's position has
been effectively refuted by the Rule 1.132 Declaration of
James C. Fleming, one of the present inventors who holds a PhD
in organic chemistry and is an expert in the field of optical
recording elements. According to Dr. Fleming, the examiner's
reliance on Beer's Law is flawed on at least two accounts for
the following reasons:
First, even if Beer's Law would be a dominant
factor, as the thickness increases and more
energy is absorbed, the energy absorbed per
unit mass remains the same. Therefore, the
energy available for mark formation remains
the same. Second, this becomes a moot point
because in thin layers the predominant effect
is the interference effect and not Beer's Law
[page 2 of Declaration, paragraph 4].
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007