Appeal No. 1998-0389 Page 2
Application No. 08/576321
BACKGROUND
The appellants’ invention relates to a system for controlling the superheat of the
metal exiting a cold wall induction guide tube apparatus in an electrostatic refining
process. An understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary
claim 1, which appears in the appendix to the appellants’ Brief.
The prior art reference of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims is:
Benz et al. (Benz) 5,332,197 Jul. 26, 1994
Claims 1-9 and 12-14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Benz.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the
appellants regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the Answer (Paper
No. 14) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the Brief
(Paper No. 13) for the appellants’ arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to the
appellants’ specification and claims, the applied prior art reference, the respective
positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner, and the guidance provided by our
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007