Appeal No. 2006-3179 Page 14
Application No. 10/477,069
translation), page 7. CF2 and CF3 are also added to the lens surface by the claimed
method. Accordingly, we agree with the Examiner that Bechetoille’s teaching about the
final fluorine content would have been considered relevant by a person of ordinary skill
in the art to the combination of Gupta and Ogawa because the end results are the
same, i.e., attachment of fluorine atoms to the surface. Appellants have not identified
any deficiency in the Examiner’s argument that it would have been obvious to have
used Gupta in view Ogawa to achieve a fluorine content in the recited range. For the
foregoing reasons, the rejection of claim 6 is affirmed.
Summary
The rejections of the claims over prior art are affirmed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007