Ex Parte Leu et al - Page 2




                  Appeal No. 2005-2181                                                                                           Page 2                       
                  Application No. 10/044,268                                                                                                                  


                           The appellants’ invention relates to a dense wavelength division multiplexing                                                      
                  (DWDM) thin film filters and particularly to the composition of layers of high reflective                                                   
                  index thin films of such thin film filters (specification, p. 1).  A copy of the claims under                                               
                  appeal is set forth in the appendix to the appellants’ brief.                                                                               
                                                             The Prior Art References                                                                         
                           The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the                                                    
                  appealed claims are:                                                                                                                        
                  Rancourt et al. (Rancourt)                     4,846,551                            Jul. 11,  1989                                          
                  Goossen                                                5,914,804                           Jun. 22, 1999                                    
                  Mitsui                                                    6,042,752                 Mar. 28, 2000                                           
                  Pelekhaty                                              6,215,592                           Apr. 10, 2001                                    
                  Adair et al. (Adair)                                6,490,381                           Dec.  3,  2002                                      
                                                                                            (filed Jun. 1, 2000)                                              
                                                                    The Rejections                                                                            
                           Claims 1 and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable                                                         
                  over Pelekhaty in view of Rancourt.                                                                                                         
                           Claims 2 to 3, 8 to 10 and 12 to 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as                                                        
                  being unpatentable over Pelekhaty and Rancourt as applied to claims 1 and 11 and                                                            
                  further in view of Adair.                                                                                                                   










Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007