Appeal No. 1996-1896
Application No. 08/206,973
Given these teachings, we conclude that the examiner has
not demonstrated that there is a suggestion of and/or a
reasonable expectation of success in forming “a precise
thickness of deposit of pyrocarbon of uniform crystallin
structure and uniform physical properties” on a substrate by
adjusting the flow rate of the hydrocarbon component in
response to the change in weight or the pressure difference in
a fluidized bed. Accordingly, we reverse the examiner’s
decision rejecting all of the appealed claims under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as unpatentable over either Emken or Accuntius alone, or
taken together with Lester.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007