Appeal No. 2005-0711
Application No. 09/943,644
Kaneko et al. (Kaneko) 6,438,307 B1 Aug. 20, 2002
(filed Mar. 24, 2000)
Fischbeck et al. (Fischbeck), “Singlemode optical waveguides
using a high temperature stable polymer with low losses in the
1.55 :m range,” Electronics Letters, pp. 518-19, Vol. 33, No. 6,
Mar. 13, 1997;
Shah et al. (Shah)1, “Fluoropolymer Nanotube Composites for
Coatings and Nanoscopic Probes,” p. 300, Polym. Mater. Sci. &
Eng. (ACS Div. PMSE), Vol. 82 (2000); and
Smith et al. (Smith), “Perfluorocyclobutane (PFCB) polyaryl
ethers: versatile coatings materials,” pp. 1-9, Journal of
Fluorine Chemistry, 4310 (2000).
The claims on appeal stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as unpatentable over Smith or Babb in view of Kennedy, Fischbeck,
Shacklette, Shah, and Kaneko (Answer, pages 6 and 10).2 Based on
the totality of the record, we reverse the rejections on appeal
essentially for the reasons stated in the Brief and those reasons
set forth below.
1
1The examiner mistakenly refers to this reference as “Shaw”
throughout the Answer (e.g., see page 5, ¶(9)). We will refer
to this document by the correct name of “Shah,” as done by
appellants (e.g., Brief, page 5).
2
2For purposes of this appeal and judicial economy, we have
combined the two rejections on appeal since they involve the same
claims, the same statutory basis, and the same secondary
references (see the Brief, page 2; the Advisory Action dated Oct.
9, 2003; and the Answer, page 2, ¶(3)). We also note that the
final rejection using Babb ‘038 as a primary reference has been
withdrawn by the examiner (Answer, pages 2 and 5).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007