Appeal No. 1998-2409
Application 08/398,259
Claims 2, 17 and 19 require that the substrate is a nickel-
based superalloy. McGill’s substrate can be such a superalloy
(col. 2, lines 37-39). However, Moroishi teaches that it is
austenitic steels whose oxidation resistance is improved by low
sulfur content (col. 2, lines 29-33). The examiner does not
explain why the applied references would have led one of ordinary
skill in the art to apply Moroishi’s teaching to nickel-based
superalloys. Claim 8 requires that the substrate is contacted
with a hydrogen-containing gas at elevated temperatures. The
examiner has not explained where the applied references disclose
this step or why they would have fairly suggested it to one of
ordinary skill in the art. We therefore reverse the rejection
over Moroishi in view of McGill of claims 2, 7, 8, 17 and 19.
DECISION
The rejection of claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over
Osozawa in view of McGill is reversed. The rejection under 35
U.S.C. § 103 over Moroishi in view of McGill of claims 1, 3-6, 9-
16, 18 and 20 is affirmed and of claims 2, 7, 8, 17 and 19 is
reversed.
-9-9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007