Appeal 2006-3027
Application 10/369,706
(5) Kimiya teaches that a method of forming a surface layer of Co
oxide on the active material powder has been suggested to
improve conductivity (col. 2, ll. 41-47);
(6) Kimiya discloses a novel active material capable of attaining an
energy density higher than a conventional active material,
comprising a multi-metals oxide with an average composition of
the surface layer different from an average composition of the
interior layer (col. 5, ll. 1-5 and 35-46);
(7) Kimiya teaches that the “multi-metals oxide” has a defined surface
layer and composition different from the interior, which improves
battery performance at high temperature (col. 7, ll. 19-58; col. 8, l.
67-col. 9, l. 24);
(8) Kimiya exemplifies a foamed nickel substrate 1 filled with an
active material 2 that is coated with a porous conductive layer 3 of
CoOOH, a Y2O3 powder 4 and a resin binder 5 (col. 10, ll. 50-67;
see Figure 3); and
(9) Kimiya exemplifies the composition of surface layers and the
interior of the “multi-metals oxide” active material (col. 24, Table
6).
Where the claimed subject matter has been rejected as obvious over a
combination of prior art references, a proper analysis under § 103 requires
consideration of at least two factors: (1) whether the prior art would have
suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art that they should make the
claimed composition or device; and (2) whether the prior art would also
have revealed that in so making, those of ordinary skill would have a
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013