Appeal No. 1996-3659
Application No. 08/237,484
by argon ion beam sputter deposition using HY-zeolite
targets,” Catalysis Letters, vol. 10, pp. 343-355, 1991.
THE REJECTIONS
Claim 10 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)as
being anticipated by Bals.
Claims 1 through 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Venkatesan in view of Bein.
Claims 1 through 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Boszormenyi in view of Venkatesan.
Claims 10 through 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as being unpatentable over Boszormenyi in view of
Venkatesan.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the respective arguments
for and against patentability by appellants and the examiner.
We sustain the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as to claim
10, and reverse each of the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as to claims 1 through 18.
The Section 103 Rejections over Boszormenyi in view of
Venkatesan
“[T]he examiner bears the initial burden, on review of
the prior art or on any other ground, of presenting a prima
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007