Appeal No. 1999-1005
Application No. 08/739,157
87, 88, 90-92, 94-99, 102, 108, 109 and 116 are rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being obvious over the Japanese reference
in view of Stewart.
We refer to the brief and reply brief and to the answer for
a complete exposition of the opposing viewpoints expressed by the
appellants and by the examiner concerning the above noted
rejections.
OPINION
We cannot sustain any of these rejections.
The Section 102 and Section 103 rejections which include
DeBoer as the primary reference are based upon the examiner’s
position that patentee discloses ingredients for his thermal
transfer system which include the ingredients of the appellants’
here claimed organization such as a nitrocellulose binder and
accordingly that patentee’s system would be inherently capable of
performing the ablation mass transfer function of the here
claimed organization. Although the examiner recognizes that
DeBoer’s system is designed to effect a laser-induced thermal dye
transfer rather than an ablation mass transfer, he nevertheless
argues that patentee’s system would inherently exhibit ablation
mass transfer by “merely turning up the laser power” (answer,
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007