Appeal 2007-3146
Application 10/002,952
We have considered all of Appellants’ arguments and evidence, and
are unpersuaded for the reasons below.
Generally, where the claimed products are identical or substantially
identical, the USPTO can require an applicant to prove that the prior art
products do not necessarily or inherently possess the characteristics of the
claimed product. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433-34
(CCPA 1977).
Tajima discloses an optical information recording medium that can
restrain warpage caused by changes in the environment or changes occurring
over time (Tajima ¶ [0001]). Tajima further explains that “changes in the
environment” includes “change[s] in temperature or humidity” (Tajima
¶ [0004]). Tajima states, “The purpose of the present invention is to solve
the aforementioned problems by providing an optical information recording
medium, which can prevent deformation (warpage) caused by changes in
temperature or humidity and can be manufactured easily” (Tajima ¶ [0012]).
As the Examiner indicated (Answer 3), Tajima’s Table 5 depicts an
embodiment that resists warpage caused by temperature and humidity
(Tajima ¶¶ [0059] to [0062]). The Table 5 embodiment includes a
transparent polycarbonate substrate layer which is 0.5 mm thick, a thin film
layer made of aluminium nitride which is 79 nm thick, a substrate protective
film made of UV cured resin 6, which is 3 microns thick, and a thin film
protection layer made of UV cured resin 7, which is 12 microns thick
(Tajima ¶ [0059]). Tajima’s Figure 10 indicates that the optical information
recording medium of the Table 5 embodiment has a very small change in
warpage angle Ө (e.g., approximately -2 to 0.5 mrad) in response to a 30%
change in humidity (Tajima ¶ [0062]; Figure 10).
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013