Appeal No. 1997-1594
Application No. 08/247,090
further need to inquire into the disclosure of any of the
secondary references combined with Bowers.
Nonetheless, we acknowledge that appellants have
mentioned specific limitations which appear in claims 2, 3, 4,
11, 12, 14 and 26 in the Brief on pages 14 and 15. We address
these limitations hereunder.
As to claim 2 which calls for codepositing two regions
of materials, we previously found that Chen taught coating two
layers, column 4, lines 33-34 and column 4, line 66 through
column 5, line 12. The manner of depositing the layers,
whether simultaneously or sequentially, whether in multiple
layers or a single layer, is considered obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art.
With respect to claim 3, we find that the claim requires
the presence of only a single component as one of the
materials may be present in an amount of zero percent.
Accordingly, no weight is accorded to the term, “blending.”
As to claim 4 which requires a “uniform and complete
coating,” we previously found that Chen coats the diamond
particles with both “carbide forming” and “brazeable”
material. We further find that Chen teaches coating the
11
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007