Appeal No. 2003-0196
Application No. 08/601,258
(annealing) of the platinum film to adjust/raise the TCR of the
element. Thus one of ordinary skill in this art, in view of the
applied combination of references, would have expected a high TCR
as taught by Wienand when using a post-deposition heat treatment.
B. The Rejection over Wienand, Uriu and Gruner
Appellants merely contest the rejection of claim 11 over the
above listed references by stating that Gruner “does not cure any
of the deficiencies” of the combination of Wienand and Uriu for the
same reasons as stated above (Brief, page 5). Accordingly, we
adopt our remarks from above. Additionally, we note that the
examiner finds that Gruner demonstrates the relationship between
the layer thickness and the TCR for nickel films, and also teaches
that this relationship is valid for platinum films (Answer, page 5,
citing the Figure of Gruner and pages 3-4).
C. Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons and those stated in the Answer, we
determine that the examiner has established a prima facie case of
obviousness in view of the reference evidence. Based on the
totality of the record, including due consideration of appellants’
arguments, we determine that the preponderance of the evidence
weighs most heavily in favor of obviousness within the meaning of
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007