Appeal No. 97-1156
Application 08/192,270
welding, as shown in Figure 3(a). Ito ‘904 simply fails to
teach a mechanical joining of an intermediate member and a
metallic member, a limitation of each of independent claims
30, 31, and 38. Thus, appellants’ claims are not anticipated
by the Ito ‘704 reference.
NEW GROUND OF REJECTION
Under the authority of 37 CFR 1.196(b), this panel of the
board introduces the following new ground of rejection.
Claim 43 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first and
second paragraphs, as lacking descriptive support in the
underlying specification and as being indefinite.
The specification (page 3) makes it clear that brazing by
the use of specified materials and heating by the use of
certain oxides are separate and distinct metallurgical joining
means.
With the above in mind, the content of claim 42 appears
to inappropriately encompass certain oxides for brazing which
were originally disclosed only for heating. Thus, the
language of claim 43 lacks descriptive support (35 U.S.C. 112,
12
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007