Appeal 2007-0501
Application 10/747,956
properties including, inter alia, mass density and/or particle-particle
interaction” (id. 2-3). Appellants contend it cannot thus be inferred that the
particles sizes disclosed by Popoola and Shimajiri can be used with the
alkali metal fluorozincates of Seseke-Koyro and Shimajiri because Popoola
teaches depositing potassium aluminum fluoride fluxes in a liquid
suspension and Shimajiri discloses potassium fluoride/aluminum fluoride
complexes in a gaseous suspension of the flux (id. 3).
The issue with respect to each ground of rejection is whether the
Examiner has carried the burden of establishing a prima facie case.
The plain language of each of independent claims 8, 11, and 12
specifies an alkali metal fluorozincate produced by reacting a different three
ingredient combination of the four ingredients alkali metal hydroxide, zinc
oxide, alkali metal fluoride and hydrogen fluoride: in claim 8, alkali metal
hydroxide and zinc oxide are mixed and hydrogen fluoride added thereto; in
claim 11, hydrogen fluoride and zinc oxide are mixed and alkali metal
hydroxide added thereto; and in claim 12, hydrogen fluoride and zinc oxide
are mixed and alkali metal fluoride added thereto. Thus, the claims are
couched in product-by-process format. See, e.g., In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d
695, 697, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). The only property of the
respective products specified in each of the independent claims is a different
grain spectrum based on the diameter of 50% of all particles wherein the
diameter is < 5 µm in claim 8, < 11 µm in claim 11, and > 11 µm in claim
12. Claim 10, dependent on claim 8, specifies a reaction product having a
grain spectrum based on 50% of all particles having a diameter of < 3.8 µm.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013