Appeal No. 2003-1940
Application No. 09/954,882
forming a contact through said first and second
inorganic and organic layers.
The examiner relies upon the following references as
evidence of obviousness:
Aoyama et al. (Aoyama) 4,618,878 Oct. 21, 1986
Matthies et al. (Matthies) 6,370,019 Apr. 09, 2002
Arai et al. (Arai) 6,404,126 Jun. 11, 2002
Appellants' claimed invention is directed to a method of
forming a light emitting device display, as well as the display
itself, comprising covering the light emitting material with a
first inorganic layer, which is covered by an organic layer,
which in turn is covered with a second inorganic layer.
Appealed claims 1-25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Mathhies in view of Aoyama, considered
alone, or in further view of Arai.
We have thoroughly reviewed the respective positions
advanced by appellants and the examiner. In so doing, we find
ourselves in agreement with appellants that the examiner has
failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness for the
claimed subject matter. Accordingly, we will not sustain the
examiner's rejections.
While we are both cognizant and appreciative of the effort
put forth by the examiner in fashioning a rationale in support of
the rejections, we must concur with appellants that the motivation
-2-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007