Ex parte BOZOVIC et al. - Page 6




                 Appeal No. 1997-1454                                                                                                                   
                 Application No. 07/931,632                                                                                                             


                 suggestion in any of the applied prior art references to                                                                               
                 create metal-atom vacancies in the alkaline earth metal layers                                                                         
                 of a thin-film superconductor, and, the lack of any teaching                                                                           
                 as to how to do so.  In this respect, we note that the                                                                                 
                 superconducting materials disclosed in the primary references                                                                          
                 (Koinuma and Takano) appear to differ from appellants'                                                                                 
                 invention in that the prior art materials have an "x" value of                                                                         
                 zero, as "x" is defined in the claims, which is not within the                                                                         
                 scope of appellants' claims.1                                                                                                          
                          For the foregoing reasons, the decision of the examiner                                                                       
                 is reversed.                                                                                                                           
                                                              REVERSED                                                                                  





                                            MARC L. CAROFF                                        )                                                     
                                            Administrative Patent Judge                           )                                                     
                                                                                                  )                                                     
                                                                                                  )                                                     
                                                                                                  )                                                     

                          1In other words, since "x" in the claimed product is 0.05                                                                     
                 to 0.3, the mole ratio of total alkaline earth metals in                                                                               
                 appellants' product is less than one; whereas the comparable                                                                           
                 mole ratio in the prior art products is exactly one.                                                                                   
                                                                           6                                                                            





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007