Appeal No. 97-0176
Application No. 08/313,604
c. Claims 3, 6, 8 and 10
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 3, 6, 8 and
10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Van
Dievoet in view of Clapham and Nilson.
Claims 3, 6, 8 and 10 each call for hot-rolling an ingot
of ZIRCALOY® material into a flat plate. Appellants'
specification (page 10) discloses that by hot-rolling the
ZIRCALOY® ingot, centerline defects inherent in prior art
processes are reduced or eliminated. We agree with the
appellants' argument (main brief, pages 15) that while hot-
rolling per se is old and well known, there is no suggestion
in the references of forming a ZIRCALOY® ingot into a flat
plate by hot-rolling.
Nilson is cited by the examiner for teaching the use of a
rolling operation in the shaping of ZIRCALOY® to orient the
constituent metal crystals in particular directions. Nilson,
however, teaches cold-rolling which is usually performed at
room temperature, not hot-rolling which takes place above the4
4Myron L. Begeman & B. H. Amstead, Manufacturing
Processes 192 (5th ed., John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1963)
-12-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007