Appeal No. 1998-2190
Application No. 08/593,266
(Answer, page 4).3 We affirm this rejection but, since we rely on
different reasoning and claim interpretation than those set forth
by the examiner, we denominate this “affirmance” as a new ground of
rejection pursuant to the provisions of 37 CFR § 1.196(b). Our
reasoning follows.
OPINION
A. The Negative Electrode with Indium Embodiment
The claims on appeal are directed to two embodiments. We
discuss the embodiment recited in claim 60 first, which is the
embodiment where the negative electrode has an active material
comprising mercuryless zinc powder and contains one or more indium
compounds selected from the group consisting of indium sulfate,
indium sulfamate and indium chloride.4
The examiner finds that Tada discloses an alkaline battery
without mercury having a negative electrode comprising mercuryless
zinc alloy powder as an anode active material and manganese
dioxide, silver oxide or nickel hydroxide as a cathode active
material (Answer, page 4). The examiner further finds that Tada
3The final rejection of claims 54-56, 58, 60, 62, 63, 65-69
and 71-81 under the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 has been
withdrawn by the examiner (Answer, page 4).
4This embodiment additionally is recited in claims 62, 63,
65, 69, 71, 72, 75-77 and 81.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007