Appeal No. 2006-0741
Reexamination Control No. 90/006,185
the appellant’s claims. The examiner recognized that, and attempted to make up the deficiency
of Raymond by relying on disclosure of the Moharam reference.
But the examiner’s reliance on Moharam is misplaced. According to the examiner,
Moharam discloses that diffraction intensity is measured as a function of wavelength, employs a
similar rigorous coupled wave analysis and is within the same field of endeavor as Raymond
(Answer at 5, lines 4-10). As is correctly noted by the appellant, however, that part of Moharam
evidently relied on by the examiner states (Moharam, p. 3219, column 2, lines 13-17):
The diffraction characteristics as a function of (1) angle of incidence, (2)
polarization, and (3) wavelength have all been measured experimentally and
calculated theoretically using a surface-relief modulated half-space model. Good
general agreement is found between theory and experiment.
That disclosure, however, reveals only that diffraction characteristics depend on the angle of
incidence of the source illumination, on the polarization of the source illumination, and on the
wavelength of the source illumination. As is stated in the introduction portion of Moharam
(page 3214, column 2, lines 3-9):
This study compares theoretically calculated and experimentally measured
angular selectivities (angle of incidence dependence of the diffraction efficiency
at a fixed wavelength) and wavelength selectivities (wavelength dependence of
the diffraction efficiency for a fixed angle of incidence) of these gratings for both
TE and TM polarizations.
The Moharam reference studies how diffraction results change based on variations in the angle
of incidence while the wavelength is fixed, and on variations in the wavelength of the source
illumination while the angle of incidence is fixed, for both TE and TM polarizations of the
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007