Ex Parte SAHIN et al - Page 4




              Appeal No. 2001-2182                                                                      4               
              Application No. 08/948,895                                                                                

              Sandhu et al. (Sandhu)                    5,284,365                   Oct.  20,  1998                     
                                                                             (Filed Jun.   24, 1996)                    
              Tsukune et al. (EP’656)                   387,656                     Sep.   19, 1990                     
              (Published European Patent Application)                                                                   
              Kim et al. (GB’345)                       2,299,345                   Oct.   02, 1996                     
              (Published UK Patent Application)                                                                         
              Endo et al. (EP’283)                      701,283                     Mar.  13, 1996                      
              (Published European Patent Application)                                                                   
              Endo, K et al. (Endo), “Preparation and Properties of Fluorinated Amorphous Carbon Thin                   
              Films by Plasma Enhanced Chemical Vapor Deposition”, Materials Research Society                           
              Symposium Proceedings, Vol. 381, pp. 249- 254 (1995).                                                     

                                                 THE REJECTIONS                                                         
              Claims 1 through 3 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable                           
              over EP’283 in view of EP’656 and Shankar.                                                                
              Claim 15 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable over                               
              EP’283 in view of EP’656 and Shankar and further in view of Endo.                                         
                     Claims 6, 7 and 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable                     
              over Shankar in view of EP’656, GB’345 and EP’283.                                                        
                     Claims 10 through 14 and 16 through 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                              
              §103(a) as being unpatentable over Shankar in view of EP’656, GB’345 and EP’283, and                      
              further in view of Endo.                                                                                  
              Claims 1 through 3 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable                           
              over EP’283 in view of Sandhu and Shankar.                                                                
              Claim 15 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable over                               






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007