Appeal No. 2003-1892
Application No. 09/681,288
subject matter of claims 1 to 23 and 26 to 32 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). We reverse
each of these rejections.
The Examiner relies on the Enmanji and Barzynski references to “establish
the reactive properties of the leuco dyes”. (Answer, p. 9). The Examiner relies on
Izu and Hu to establish that “oxygen permeability is an inherent property of organic
protective layer[s].” (Answer, p. 10).
The Enmanji, Barzynski, Izu and Hu references do not remedy the flaw in the
Examiner’s reasoning identified above. The reactive properties of the leuco dyes
disclosed by Enmanji and Barzynski, does not provide motivation to use a reactive
layer disposed between an oxygen permeable UV coating and the substrate layer of
an optical recording media as required by the claimed subject matter. In addition,
the teachings of Izu and Hu does not established that the protective layers
comprising UV curable resins described by Nishida, Shinkai and Takagishi would
necessarily, or inherently have oxygen permeability.
CONCLUSION
The rejections of claims 1 to 9, 20 to 23 and 26 to 29 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as unpatentable over the combination of Rollhaus and either one of
Nishida, Shinkai or Takagishi; claims 1 to 9, 11 to 14, 20 to 23, 26 to 29, 31 and 32
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over the over the combination of
-9-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007