Appeal No. 2003-1928
Application No. 09/511,833
The Examiner rejected claims 1 to 12 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
obvious over the combination of Fan and Chang. The Examiner also rejected claims 1 to 12
as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over the combination of Fan and
Shuman. (Answer, pp. 3 to 6).
DISCUSSION
We have carefully reviewed the claims, specification and applied prior art, including
all of the arguments advanced by both the Examiner and Appellant in support of their
respective positions. This review leads us to conclude that the rejections of claims 1 to 12
are not well founded. We will limit our discussion to the independent claim 1.
Rather than reiterate the respective positions advanced by the Examiner and
Appellant, we refer to the Examiner’s Answer and to Appellant’s Brief for a complete
exposition thereof.
Fan is directed to a flexographic element having an infrared ablatable layer capable of
being selectively removed by a laser beam. The flexographic element comprises a support, a
photopolymerizable layer, at least one barrier layer and at least one infrared-sensitive layer.
The infrared-sensitive layer is opaque to actinic radiation and is ablatable from the surface of
the barrier layer upon exposure to infrared laser radiation. The barrier layer is soluble,
swellable, dispersible or liftable in the developer solution for the photopolymerizable layer.
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007