Ex parte GAO et al. - Page 7




          Appeal No. 96-1353                                                          
          Application 07/696,973                                                      


          examiner’s position that oxidation prior to spraying is the                 
          equivalent of oxidation subsequent to spraying.                             
               In addition, even assuming, arguendo, that MacKay is                   
          analogous art, we can perceive no teaching, suggestion or                   
          incentive which would have motivated one of ordinary skill in the           
          art to substitute the molten metal nozzle deposition technique              
          disclosed in MacKay for the plasma spraying system of Jasper.               
          Here, there is no evidence to support a conclusion that the                 
          application of the Jasper materials by the MacKay process would             
          result in the objectives of the Jasper invention being met.                 
               For the reasons expressed above, it is our conclusion that             
          the applied references fail to establish a prima facie case of              
          obviousness with respect to the subject matter recited in claim             
          1.  This being the case, the rejection of claim 1 is not                    
          sustained nor, it follows, is the rejection of all of the other             
          claims before us, which depend from claim 1.                                











                                          7                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007