Ex parte HATTORI - Page 2




          Appeal No. 95-3336                                                          
          Application No. 07/984,448                                                  


          (brief, page 2).  This method includes the steps of joining                 
          ceramic compacts along their mating surfaces by cold isostatic              
          pressing (CIP) followed by firing the integrated compact to                 
          obtain sintering (id.).  Claim 1 is illustrative of the                     
          subject matter on appeal and is reproduced below:                           
          1.  A method for manufacturing a ceramic having at least one                
          hole comprising the steps of:                                               
               forming independently at least two ceramic compacts, said              
          ceramic compacts having their shapes corresponding to the                   
          divided parts of one integrated body having at least one hole               
          along which the integrated body is divided;                                 
               joining said ceramic compacts into an integrated form                  
          having at least one hole by cold isostatic pressing; and                    
               firing the integrated compact.                                         
               The examiner has relied upon the following references as               
          evidence of obviousness:                                                    
          Hattori et al. (Hattori)      4,248,813          Feb.  3, 1981              
          Conder et al. (Conder)        4,662,958          May   5, 1987              
          Yogo et al. (Yogo)            5,106,550          Apr. 21, 1992              
               Claims 1 through 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103                
          as unpatentable over Conder in view of Hattori or Yogo                      
          (answer, page 3).  We reverse the examiner’s rejection for                  
          reasons which follow.                                                       
                                                                                     

                                          2                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007