Appeal 2006-2650
Application 10/011,886
The Examiner made the following rejections:
1. Claims 1-6, 9-16, and 19-20 under 35 U.S.C § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Kasami in view of Tyan;
2. Claims 1-6, 9-16, and 19-20 under 35 U.S.C § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Kasami in view of Tyan, and further in view of Uno; and
3. Claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C § 103(a) as unpatentable over Kasami
in view of Tyan and Uno, and further in view of Zhou.
ISSUES
The Examiner contends that it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have modified
Kasami’s multilayer stack in view of the secondary references. Appellants
contend that one of ordinary skill in the art would not have had a reasonable
expectation of success in making the Examiner’s proposed combinations.
The issue before us is: Has the Examiner established motivation based on a
reasonable expectation of success to make the proposed
combinations/modifications within the meaning of 35 U.S.C
§ 103(a) and, if so, have Appellants overcome the Examiner’s prima facie
showing of obviousness by establishing that the prior art teaches away from
the claimed invention?
RELEVANT FINDINGS OF FACT
Kasami
1) Kasami discloses a phase change optical recording medium, an
embodiment thereof being shown in Figure 8 below:
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013