Appeal No. 1996-3367 Page 12
Application No. 08/480,554
reaction of Böttger at over pressures within the claimed range
from such a disclosure. Accordingly, we shall sustain the
examiner's § 103 rejection of claim 6.
Rejection of Claim 7
Here, we find ourselves in agreement with appellants'
position (brief, page 10) in that the examiner has not
furnished a sufficient factual basis to support the notion
that the claimed step of setting the gauge pressure by inert
gas blanketing would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art at the time of the invention from the relied
upon references' teachings. While Berkowitz may disclose the
use of a diluent such as nitrogen in a process similar to that
of Böttger as proffered by the examiner (answer, page 4), the
examiner has not pointed to any evidence establishing the
obviousness of setting a gauge pressure of 0.4 to 0.6 bar by
inert gas blanketing. Accordingly, we will not sustain the
examiner's stated rejection of claim 7 on this record.
Rejection of Claims 8 and 13
As set forth above, we have selected claim 8 as the
representative claim on which we decide the appeal of the
examiner's rejection as to this grouping of claims and we find
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007