Appeal No. 95-2647
Application 08/068,105
The Rejections3
Claims 1-4 and 14-17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Shapland
in view of Russo.
Claims 1-19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Shapland in view
of Russo and further in view of Arakawa.
Grouping of Claims
Appellants have stated that the rejected claims do not stand or fall together and has grouped the
claims as follows (brief, p. 3):
Group I: Claims 1-4 and 14-17 which are directed to the basic refractory slide gate plate
comprising a refractory plate member and a refractory base plate which includes an inert gas supply
groove.
Group II: Claims 5, 7-9 and 18 which add to Group I the width and depth of the gas supply
groove.
Group III: Claims 6, 10-13 and 19 which define the refractory plate member set forth in Group
I as being formed of Al O -ZrO -C-based refractory material or a ZrO -based refractory material.2 3 2 2
2Opinion
We have carefully considered the respective positions advanced by appellants and the examiner.
However, for the reasons set forth below, we will not sustain either of the the examiner's rejections.
The final Office action included a third rejection, a rejection of claims 1-4 and 14-17 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as3
being unpatentable over either Russo <131 (U.S. Patent No. 5,004,131) or Russo <034 (U.S. Patent No. 5,100,034).
Appellant was advised by the examiner in an advisory action (paper no. 13) that this rejection has been withdrawn.
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007