Appeal No. 1998-2401
Application 08/286,106
references in such a way that would have led one of ordinary
skill in the art to incorporate the method of Ehrlich of forming
build-up layers into the method of Tamamura, wherein Tamamura
uses the build-up layers as etch masks or as a mask for doping.
However, we find the disparate teachings of each of these
references (maskless method of Ehrlich involving
photodissociation of an absorbed molecular monolayer versus
Tamamura's etching of a silicone layer using a graft polymer
pattern as a mask) lacks the requirement that some teaching,
suggestion or incentive derived from the prior art supports the
combination. ACS Hosp. Sys., Inc. v. Montefiore Hosp., 732 F.2d
at 1577, 221 USPQ at 933.
Hence, we also reverse the rejection of claims 1, 5-7, 10-
13, and 17-19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
the combination of Ehrlich and Tamamura.
III. The rejection of claim 2 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Ehrlich and Jelks as
applied to claim 1 and further in view of Dooley
As mentioned supra, the applied art of Ehrlich and Jelks
fails to provide a prima facie case of obviousness with respect
to claim 1; hence, because Dooley does not cure the
aforementioned
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007