Appeal No. 2001-0727
Application No. 08/215,446
The examiner's rejection of claims 15 and 17-19 over the
collective teachings of Block, Chandler '232, Chandler '017 and
Wilson is not on any sounder ground. Chandler '017 and Wilson do
not remedy the deficiency of the combined teachings of Block and
Chandler '232 discussed above, i.e., the obviousness of
incorporating phosphoric acid in a treatment composition
comprising a zinc and aluminum salt.
We will sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 11-14, 16
and 21-23 over Block in view of Chandler '232 and McAllister, as
well as the examiner's rejection of claims 31 and 32 over
McAllister in view of Strater. Like appellant, McAllister
discloses a method of inhibiting catalyzed oxidation of carbon-
carbon composites by treating the composites with a liquid
composition comprising phosphoric acid, zinc salt, an aluminum
salt and a material containing boron (see TABLE II, as well as
the state of the prior art discussed at column 2, lines 19 et
seq.) From our perspective, the collective teachings of
Chandler, Block and McAllister, as well as McAllister alone,
would have rendered the claimed method of treating a carbon-
carbon composite with a liquid composition comprising phosphoric
acid, a zinc salt, an aluminum salt and boron obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007