Appeal No. 2005-2181 Page 4
Application No. 10/044,268
USPQ2d 1089, 1091 (Fed. Cir. 1991) and In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425, 208 USPQ
871, 881 (CCPA 1981).
The examiner finds that Pelekhaty describes the invention as claimed except that
Pelekhaty does not describe that the high refractive index thin film is comprised of
indium-tin oxide.
We find that Pelekhaty describes a Fabry-Perot filter that includes at least one
pair of reflective elements such as mirrors separated by a fixed distance. The distance
between the mirrors may be adjusted to tune the filter to reflect a selected channel
wavelength of optical energy (col. 2, lines 1 to 6). The mirrors are formed by depositing
alternating layers of high and low index of refraction materials to achieve desired
reflectiveness (col. 2, lines 50 to 52). One of the materials described as a material that
can form the low or high refractive index material is zirconium oxide (col. 5, lines 24 to
29).
The examiner relies on Rancourt for teaching that it is known that indium-tin
oxide may be substituted for zirconium oxide and concludes:
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the
time the invention was made to use the indium tin oxide film taught by
Rancourt in the Pelekhaty invention for the purpose of having a film with
low resistance to light transmission and high scratch resistance [answer at
pages 4 to 5].
The appellants argue that there is no motivation to combine the teachings of
Pelekhaty and Rancourt.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007