Appeal No. 2000-1324
Application No. 08/649,487
adheres to the inner surface of the cover component, which
thereby allows an effective photocatalytic reaction to ensue."
Modifying Akira's lighting device to include the photo catalytic
layer on the outside surface would destroy the purpose of the
invention. The Federal Circuit has held that "a proposed
modification [is] inappropriate for an obviousness inquiry when
the modification render[s] the prior art reference inoperable for
its intended purpose." In re Fritch, 23 USPQ2d 1780, n. 12,
citing In re Gordon, 733 F.2d 900, 902, 221 USPQ 1125, 1127 (Fed.
Cir. 1984). Accordingly, it would not have been obvious to the
skilled artisan to modify Akira's lighting device to have the
photo catalytic layer on the outside surface.
The examiner further asserts (Answer, page 5) that:
It would have been an expedient of an artisan to use
layer on outside or inside of the transmitting portion,
since applicant has not disclosed that layer on the
outside surface solves any stated problem or is for any
particular purpose and it appears that the invention
would perform equally well with layer on the inside
surface.
However, appellant (throughout the specification) discloses
forming the photo catalytic layer on the outer surface to
decompose materials attached to the surface of the luminaire such
as sources of bad smells and dust, nicotine or oil stains, while
still absorbing harmful ultraviolet radiation.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007