Appeal No. 2000-1244
Application 08/826,111
Turning to Hintz, we find that Hintz teaches a dual layer
optical medium having partially reflective thin layer. In
particular, we find that Hintz teaches in figure 1a that an
optical storage medium 12 comprises a transparent substrate 14, a
partially reflective thin film layer 16 on a first data pit
pattern 15, a transparent spacer layer 18, and a highly
reflective thin film layer 20 on a second data pit pattern 19.
See column 2, line 60, through column 3, line 2, of Hintz. Upon
our review of Hintz, we find no suggestion of using amorphous
selenium or a recognition of its optical properties.
Upon our review of Hintz and Utsumi, we fail to find the
either reference teaches or appreciates the optical properties of
amorphous selenium. Therefore, we find that the Examiner has not
met the initial burden of coming forward with evidence that would
show that those skilled in the art would have reasons for making
the Examiner’s proposed modification.
Turning to the rejection of claim 9 as being unpatentable
over Hintz in view of Utsumi and further in view of Best, we note
that the Examiner relies on Best only for the teaching of
sputtering as a process known in the art for depositing films.
See page 6 of the Examiner’s answer. Therefore, Best is not
relied on for providing any substantial evidence as to why one of
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007