Appeal 2007-0835
Application 09/950,778
1. Luminescent intensifying screen comprising a self-supporting or
supported layer of phosphor particles dispersed in a binding medium and,
adjacent thereto, a protective coating characterized in that said protective
coating comprises a urethane acrylate binder and titanium dioxide as a white
pigment and in that said protective coating has a surface roughness (Rz)
between 2 and 10 µm.
The references relied upon by the Examiner are as follows:
Van Landeghem US 4,386,431 May 31, 1983
Van Havenbergh US 6,120,902 Sep. 19, 2000
Yamane US 6,188,073 Feb. 13, 2001
The Examiner rejects claims 1, 2, and 4-12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as unpatentable over Yamane in view of Van Landeghem and Havenbergh.2
II. DISCUSSION
A. Issue
The Examiner’s rejection is based on the teaching in Yamane of a
luminescent intensifying screen including the claimed supported phosphor
layer and a protective coating (Answer 4). The Examiner acknowledges that
Yamane does not specifically disclose urethane acrylate as a binder in the
protective layer or the level of roughening of the protective layer surface
(id.). According to the Examiner, it would have been obvious to roughen the
surface of Yamane’s protective layer for the same reasons as Van
2 The Examiner listed the rejection of claims 11 and 12 separately in the
Final Office Action, however, the Examiner combines the two rejections as
one in the Answer. Appellant lists two rejections under separate headings in
the Brief but includes no sufficiently specific separate arguments to claims
11 and 12 for separate consideration. Therefore, we list the rejection as one
rejection and select claim 1, the broadest independent claim to represent the
issues on appeal.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013