Appeal No. 2002-0405
Application No. 07/325,269
- p. 10, l. 3 (emphasis added). Thus, it would have been obvious
to have produced a superconducting mixed metal oxide using
gadolinium in place of lanthanum given Bednorz’ teaching that
superconductivity is exhibited in the La-Ba-Cu-O mixed metal
oxide system.
5. Claims 3, 19/5 - 19/8 and 19/15 - 19/18 are rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) as anticipated by or, in the
alternative, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over Chu.
Claims 3 and 19/15 - 19/18
Chu discloses superconducting compounds of the La-Ba-Cu-O
system. Since there would be no reason to expect that the
claimed compounds differ from those of Chu, claims 3 and 19/15 -
19/18 are anticipated by, or obvious over, Chu. See, supra, pp.
9-10 (discussion on patentability of product-by-process claims).
Claim 19/5
Chu discloses the preparation of superconductive mixed metal
oxides in the La-Ba-Cu-O system by a solid-state reaction method
wherein La2O3, CuO and BaCO3 (a metal salt) are mixed. Chu, p.
405, col. 1. For the reasons discussed above (see, supra, pp. 9-
10), there would be no reason to expect that the claimed
compounds differ from those of Chu. Therefore, claim 19/5 is
anticipated by, or obvious over, Chu.
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007