Appeal No. 2005-0532
Application No. 10/152,877 Page 3
(Fed. Cir. 1992); In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468, 1471-1472, 223
USPQ 785, 787-788 (Fed. Cir. 1984). Accordingly, we will not
sustain the examiner’s rejection.
All of the claims on appeal require a photographic material
including a substrate having an image side and a mordant-coated
non-image side.
The examiner recognizes that Yutzy does not include a
mordant coating on any side of the opaque support thereof.
Rather, as illustrated in drawing Figure 1 of Yutzy, an opaque
support (10) includes a receiving layer (14) on one side thereof
and a light-sensitive layer (12) on the other side of the
support.
Campbell discloses a photographic element including a
support coated with a layer containing a silver halide emulsion
and an image-dye providing material and further including an
image-receiving layer including a polymeric dye-mordant.
According to the examiner, “it would be obvious to one skilled in
the art to use polymeric dye mordants, including those disclosed
in Campbell et al., in the receiving layers of Yutzy et al. to
prevent migration of the dye images formed in the receiving
layers of Yutzy et al.” (numbered paragraph 3 of office action
mailed April 11, 2003, as referred to at page 3 of the answer).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007