Appeal No. 1998-0553
Application 08/405,372
passing an electric current around the electrical circuit which includes the scrap graphite,
thereby causing the scrap graphite to disintegrate and graphite particles to fall through the
grill or perforations. Further details of this appealed subject matter are set forth in
representative independent claim 27 which reads as follows:
27. A method of treating scrap graphite having a metal contaminant
adhered thereto to separate the metal from the graphite, which method comprises the
steps of:
(a) placing scrap graphite having a metal contaminant adhered
thereto into a bath comprising an aqueous oxidizing electrolyte, the graphite being
contained in one or more baskets having at least a base which has a grill or perforations to
allow graphite particles to fall therethrough;
(b) applying to the scrap graphite an electric current contact whereby
the graphite forms one electrode of an electrolytic cell;
(c) providing a second electrode in contact with the electrolyte; and
(d) passing an electric current around the electrical circuit comprising
the electric current contact, the scrap graphite, the electrolyte and the second electrode
thereby causing the scrap graphite to disintegrate and graphite particles to fall through the
grill or perforations.
The references relied upon by the examiner as evidence of obviousness are:
Parrish 429,386 Jun. 3, 1890
Fromm 2,903,402 Sep. 8, 1959
A comparison of section (11) (Grounds of Rejection) and section (13) (Response to
Argument) in the Examiner’s Answer reveals a lack of clarity as to whether the § 112,
second paragraph, rejection set forth in the final office action has been advanced on this
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007