Appeal No. 2003-2021 Page 3
Application No. 09/753,703
that the “lossy urethane” materials taught by appellant’s
specification are the same as “known dielectric urethane ...
materials” encompassed by the claim limitation “a material that
absorbs electromagnetic radiation” (Answer, page 5, citing a
dictionary definition of “lossy”). Accordingly, the examiner
concludes that Akram describes every limitation of claim 5 on
appeal (Answer, page 9).
The examiner and appellant agree that Akram fails to
disclose or suggest that barrier glob top materials absorb
electromagnetic radiation (Brief, page 5; Answer, page 6, last
two lines). It is also not contested that Akram discloses that a
barrier glob top material is selected to provide “low moisture
permeability, low thermal coefficient of expansion, good adhesion
and sealing properties. Preferred barrier glob top materials
include epoxy, polyamide, urethane [sic “,”] silicone, acrylic or
the like.” Akram, col. 4, ll. 2-6 (Brief, page 4; Answer, page
6). Finally, both appellant and the examiner agree that
appellant’s specification discloses that examples of lossy
materials suitable to absorb electromagnetic radiation include
“materials such as lossy foam materials, lossy urethane sheet
materials, and lossy multi-layer materials that enable the core
of the material to act primarily as a low-resistance element,
while the outside of the material presents a good insulator.”
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007