Appeal No. 94-1325
Application No. 07/882,928
In light of the above, we understand the recitation in
claim 5 of one intense beam of energy capable of generating a
vapour space in the metal as being required by the underlying
disclosure to be a beam with a power density threshold of several
million watts per square centimeter. This intense beam, as
disclosed and claimed, will vaporize metal within a rail or wheel
to form a vapour space extending at least 5 mm into the rail or
wheel, and permit the depositing of an alloying material within
the vapour space.
Having reviewed the teaching of Gnanamuthu in its
entirety, it is at once apparent to us that this patent, in
particular, would not have been suggestive of an intense beam of
energy with a power density threshold of several million watts per
square centimeter.
Further, lacking this aforementioned specific intense beam, we are
persuaded that the claimed vapour space extending at least 5 mm
into a rail or wheel would not have been suggested to one of
ordinary skill in the art by the Gnanamuthu patent. For these
reasons, we conclude that the evidence relied upon by the examiner
would not have rendered the now claimed method obvious.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007