Ex Parte Groh et al - Page 6


               Appeal No. 2005-0567                                                                                                  
               Application 10/280,391                                                                                                

                       The method of providing a cast article encompassed by appealed claim 6 comprises at                           
               least the steps of providing a molten mass of metal having the specified composition by any                           
               process, and casting the molten metal by any process to form a cast article, which articles can be                    
               hot isostatic pressed by any process, otherwise heat treated by any process, placed into any                          
               service application at a maximum service temperature of at least about 1300°F (704.444°C), that                       
               is, at a service temperature range having an limit that is equal to or exceeds about 1300°F                           
               (704.444°C), and welded to any piece of any metal by any process, as in claims 7, 8, 10, and 11,                      
               respectively.  The method of preparing a welded article encompassed by appealed claim 12                              
               comprises at least the steps of providing a piece of material having the specified composition by                     
               any process, and welding the piece of metal to any piece of metal by any process to form the                          
               welded article, which can include surface welding by any process as in claim 15.  The                                 
               transitional term “comprising” in claims 6 and 12 opens appealed claims 6 through 12 and 15 to                        
               methods that include any manner of steps and materials in addition the steps and compositions                         
               listed.  See In re Baxter, 656 F.2d 679, 686-87, 210 USPQ 795, 802-03 (CCPA 1981) (“As long                           
               as one of the monomers in the reaction is propylene, any other monomer may be present,                                
               because the term ‘comprises’ permits the inclusion of other steps, elements, or materials.”).                         
                       The examiner relies on the heat resistant alloys having excellent hot workability                             
               containing the elements set forth in Sekino claim 2 (answer, page 4).  We find the same                               
               disclosure at col. 2, ll. 1-11 of the reference, and refer only to this disclosure in the remainder of                
               our opinion.                                                                                                          
                       We find that, prima facie, one of ordinary skill in this art routinely following the teaching                 
               at col. 2, ll. 1-11, in light of the other disclosure in Sekino1 would have reasonably arrived at                     
               compositions that are heat resistant nickel alloys which have the properties taught by the                            
               reference.  In other words, one of ordinary skill in this art can select the elements from among                      
               those disclosed, in any amount within the weight percent range taught for each element, to form                       
                                                                                                                                    
               1 It is well settled that a reference stands for all of the specific teachings thereof as well as the                 
               inferences one of ordinary skill in this art would have reasonably been expected to draw                              
               therefrom, see In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1264-65, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1782-83 (Fed. Cir.                               
               1992); In re Preda, 401 F.2d 825, 826, 159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968); Aller, 220 F.2d at                              
               458-59, 105 USPQ at 237, presuming skill on the part of this person.  In re Sovish, 769 F.2d 738,                     
               743, 226 USPQ 771, 774 (Fed. Cir. 1985).                                                                              

                                                                - 6 -                                                                



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007