Appeal No. 2002-2274
Application No. 08/387,158
0.01-0.05% by weight. Higher amounts of indium have the opposite
effect.” Linder’s teaching that the indium content can be about
0.1 wt% (col. 1, lines 24-25), however, would have indicated to
one of ordinary skill in the art that the desired anode potential
and high current efficiency would be obtained not only at the
upper limit of 0.1 wt% set forth in this excerpt, but also at
indium contents which are about 0.1 wt%, such as 0.11 wt%.
For the above reasons we conclude that the reinforced
concrete structure claimed in the appellants’ claim 33 would have
been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art over Linder and
the prior art applied therewith.
Claim 39
The appellants argue that the “consisting essentially of”
transition term in claim 39 excludes Linder’s 0.01 to 1.0 wt%
manganese because it would alter the basic and novel
characteristics of the alloy recited therein (brief, page 17).
The term “consisting essentially of” includes not only what is
specifically recited in the appellants’ claim, but also any other
materials which do not materially affect the basic and novel
characteristics of the claimed invention. See In re Herz, 537
F.2d 549, 551-2, 190 USPQ 461, 463 (CCPA 1976); In re De Lajarte,
337 F.2d 870, 873-4, 143 USPQ 256, 258 (CCPA 1964); In re
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007