Ex Parte Metzger - Page 5




              Appeal No. 2003-1928                                                                                      
              Application No. 09/511,833                                                                                

              type of barrier layer is one which is soluble, swellable or dispersible in the developer solvent          
              prior to exposure to actinic radiation, but is not affected by the developer solvent after                
              exposure to actinic radiation.  Fan does not indicate that wax, wax-like or resinous materials            
              are suitable for use in the barrier layer.                                                                
                     Neither Chang or Shuman suggest the advantages or suitability of using wax, wax-                   
              like or resinous materials in Fan’s flexographic element.  There is no indication that the                
              thermal imaging release layer comprising wax, wax-like or resinous materials as described                 
              by Chang would have the properties required by Fan.  Specifically, there is no indication that            
              the materials of the thermal imaging release layer are soluble, swellable, dispersible or                 
              liftable in developer solutions for the photopolymerizable layer.  Similarly, there is no                 
              indication that the thermal ink transfer laminate release layer comprising wax and resinous               
              materials as described by Shuman would have the properties required by Fan.  Here again                   
              there is no indication that the materials of the thermal ink transfer laminate release layer are          
              soluble, swellable, dispersible or liftable in developer solutions for the photopolymerizable             
              layer.  The Examiner has not made this assertion nor has the Examiner directed us to                      
              evidence which would support this position.                                                               
                     We agree with Appellant, Brief page 5, that the Examiner’s motivation for                          
              substituting the resinous binder of Fan with the wax or wax like material of Chang is based               
              on a misunderstanding of Chang.  Contrary to the Examiner’s position, Chang does not teach                
                                                          -5-                                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007