Interference No. 103,141
respect to oxygen and with respect to the oxide powder under
the heat treating conditions.
Count A differs from the original count 1 of the
interference in two major respects. First, count A is
directed to the so-called orifice-free cladding embodiment.
Secondly, count A is generic to two species of the invention,
viz., the cross-section reduction with subsequent sintering
species, and the sintering with simultaneous or subsequent
cross-section reduction species. Original count 1 was
directed only to the cross-section reduction with subsequent
sintering subject matter.
With respect to the orifice-free limitation of the
count, Judge Smith acknowledged that, as originally declared,
the Sawada claims designated as corresponding to count 1 were
both cladding with orifice claims and orifice-free claims,
while the Jin claims designated as corresponding to count 1
were directed
only to the cladding with orifices subject matter.
Accordingly, Judge Smith granted the motion to the extent that
two new counts were substituted for count 1. New count 2 is
14
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007