Appeal No. 1999-0542
Application 08/760,557
relationship despite this possible effect. Bost places a
titanium nitride layer directly on the aluminum alloy layer
even though appellants’ specification indicates that this is
to be avoided by the invention. Thus, the multi-layer
metalization of Bost does not suggest the method set forth in
appellants’ claims.
For these reasons, we do not sustain the examiner’s
third rejection noted above. With respect to the fourth
rejection noted above, we again find that Sumi does not
overcome the deficiencies of the applied prior art discussed
above. Therefore, we also do not sustain the examiner’s
fourth rejection.
In conclusion, we have not sustained any of the
examiner’s rejections of the claims on appeal. Therefore, the
decision of the examiner rejecting claims 42-57 is reversed.
REVERSED
ERROL A. KRASS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
-12-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007