Appeal No. 96-2810
Application 08/017,086
statutory basis, it stands alone. We elect to decide the
merits of the appealed rejections on the basis of Claims 1, 7,
and 9 which are reproduced below:
1. A ceramic glaze comprising 20 to 60% by weight
of water, 40 to 80% by weight of ceramic raw materials
selected from the group consisting of feldspars, clays,
kaolin, quartz, metal oxides, and frits and a thickening
amount of a hydrophobically modified cellulose ether
having a weight percent hydrophobic modification between
0.1 and 2.0.
7. A process for glazing sanitary ceramic articles
selected from the group consisting of toilets, sinks and
bathtubs comprising the steps
a. spraying an unglazed ceramic article
with an aqueous glaze of (i) 40 to 80% by weight
of ceramic raw materials selected from the group
consisting of feldspars, clays, kaolin, quartz,
metal oxides, and frits, (ii) a thickening amount
of a hydrophobically modified hydroxyethylcellulose,
and (iii) optional sodium polyphosphate,
b. drying until the article can be handled
without marring the surface glaze, and
c. firing to produce a glazed sanitary ceramic
article.
9. The glazed ceramic article prepared by the
process of claim 7.[3]
Discussion
1. Section 103 Rejection
3 In appellants’ Appendix, Claim 9 is incorrectly
transcribed. Pending Claim 9 depends from process Claim 7,
not ceramic glaze Claim 6.
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007