Appeal 2007-4227
Application 10/409,417
40. The only finding of fact that Kutilek disputes is the Examiner's
finding that Chopin inherently teaches shifting the transition temperature of
the titania. (Br. at 3–4.)
41. Kutilek argues that claim 1 "can be viewed as a new use (i.e., shifting
the amorphous to crystalline transition temperature of a titania coating
material) of some of the coating materials discussed in Chopin." (Br. at 3.)
42. Kutilek argues further that "[b]ecause Chopin does not disclose a
method of shifting the amorphous to crystalline transition temperature of a
titania coating material as recited in claim 1 of the present invention, it does
not disclose each and every element of the invention. Therefore, Chopin
cannot anticipate the present invention as recited in claim 1." (Br. at 4.)
43. Kutilek argues that claims 2–6, 13, and 14, which depend from
claim 1, are not anticipated for the same reason. (Br. at 4.)
44. Kutilek does not dispute the Examiner's findings that Chopin teaches
the additional limitations recited in the dependent claims.
Obviousness
45. The Examiner finds that Chopin teaches coating substrates with doped
titania using CVD or pyrolysis, but does not teach the deposition
temperature. (Answer at 4.)
46. The Examiner also finds that Chopin does not teach the combination
of anatase and monoclinic forms recited in claim 11. (Answer at 4.)
47. The Examiner finds further that Chopin teaches heat treatment of the
coated substrate, but does not teach the time and temperature of the heat
treatment as recited in claim 12. (Answer at 4.)
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013