Appeal 2007-1851
Application 10/020,461
Bazylenko, Johnson discloses that the invention is directed to forming
optical waveguides and optical multiplexers (see col. 1, second para., and
col. 2, ll. 54-62). Consequently, we are satisfied that one of ordinary skill in
the art would have understood that the high density plasma deposition
method taught by Johnson can be used to form a plurality, and not just one,
silicate glass optical core over an undercladding. Again, we agree with the
Examiner that Dragone further evidences the obviousness of forming such a
plurality of optical cores. As for the difference in index of refraction of the
core and the undercladding, Appellants acknowledge that “Johnson does
disclose that the optical cladding can include any number of materials
having a lower index of refraction than the thin film forming the optical
component” (principal Br. 14, second para.). As discussed above, Kyoto, as
well as, for that matter, Bazylenko, evidences that a difference in index of
refraction of greater than 2% was conventional in the art.
Regarding separately argued claim 15, which calls for forming the
optical cores by etching a substantially continuous optical core layer,
Bazylenko expressly discloses that “[o]ther standard fabrication processes
(for example chemical etching) may be utilised with the method of the
present invention . . .” (col. 2, ll. 48 et seq.). Furthermore, as pointed out by
the Examiner, Dragone teaches the use of photolithographic techniques,
which include etching, to pattern the waveguides (see col. 6, ll. 41-46).
Appellants also separately argue claims 24-27, 31-33, and 39-41
which recite the use of nitrogen as a source gas. We do not subscribe to
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013