Appeal No. 2000-1324
Application No. 08/649,487
Also, the examiner states (Answer, page 6) that "to use a
titanium oxide layer in a luminaire for deodorizing purpose,
he/she [the artisan] must have to coat such layer on the glass
globe since the lamp 61 is housed in the globe 63. If artisan
coats the lamp 61 . . ., it would serve no purpose." However, as
pointed out by appellant (Reply Brief, page 2), the examiner has
failed to appreciate how Akira's device accomplishes its
deodorizing function. Akira discloses (Translation, pages 10-
11):
The air in the cover component (3) becomes heated at
this time, and is discharged to the outside from the
gas discharge aperture (3B). Fresh air simultaneously
flows in from the outside through the influx aperture
(3A) therein (3). The odoriferous and harmful gases
flow into the cover component (3) along with the air,
are rendered odorless and harmless by the
photocatalytic reaction, and discharged to the outside.
Orderly repetition of this process purifies the entire
room interior space and other enclosed places.
Thus, contrary to the examiner's assertions, the titanium oxide
layer does not need to be on the outside of the luminaire for
deodorizing purposes, as Akira clearly discloses a device which
accomplishes such functions with the photo catalytic layer on the
inner surface of the luminaire. Therefore, the examiner has
failed to provide appropriate evidence or a convincing line of
reasoning to establish a prima facie case of obviousness.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007