Appeal No. 95-3336
Application No. 07/984,448
OPINION
The method of appealed claim 1 recites three steps,
namely, forming at least two ceramic compacts with their
shapes corresponding to the divided parts of one integrated
body having at least one hole along which the integrated body
is divided, joining the ceramic compacts into an integrated
form having at least one hole by CIP, and firing the
integrated compact.
The examiner finds that Conder discloses a method of
manufacturing a ceramic having at least one hole (answer, page
3). The only difference found by the examiner between the
process of Conder and the claimed method is that Conder
discloses the compacts are bonded by “thermo compression”
while the claimed method recites cold isostatic pressing
followed by firing (answer, page 3). The examiner
characterizes the “thermo compression” of Conder as a
“simultaneous step of firing and compressing” (answer, page
4).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007