Appeal No. 1999-0405
Application No. 08/651,571
Appellants assert that the Hattori reference is non-
analogous art because it is not within appellants’ field of
endeavor (i.e., molten metal pumps/impellers) or reasonably
pertinent to the particular problem that appellants address
(i.e., attaching a silicon carbide bearing ring to a graphite
impeller of a molten metal pump). Appellants also argue that
Hattori is not even a general teaching on mating of two
components, because it is specific to the bonding of fluorine
resin articles, and that, even if it were analogous art, there
is no motivation or justification supporting the examiner’s
proposed combinations with Thut and Cooper since 1) the
applied references do not in any way recognize a problem with
the attachment of a bearing ring to a molten metal pump
impeller and 2) there is no justification for applying the
teachings of Hattori relating to bonding fluorine resin
articles to metal to a structure involving attaching a silicon
carbide bearing ring to a graphite impeller which is to be
immersed in molten metal as in Thut and Cooper. In this
regard, appellants assert that the examiner has employed an
improper "obvious to try" standard of patentability and relied
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007