Appeal No. 1996-4176
Application No. 08/287,915
free.” If appellants had intended to exclude magnesium, they
would have inserted the language “magnesium-free.” As that
language is absent from both the specification and claimed
subject matter, we conclude that the language “consisting
essentially of” does not exclude the presence of magnesium.
Based upon the above considerations and findings, we conclude
that the examiner has established a prima facie case of
obviousness against each of the claims rejected over
Japan(‘044).
DECISION
The rejection of claims 1 through 31, and 33 through 37
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over the admitted prior
art in view of Kempf is reversed.
The rejection of claims 8 through 12 and 33 through 37
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Japan (‘044) is
affirmed.
The decision of the examiner is Affirmed-in-Part.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007