Appeal No. 1999-0928
Application No. 08/334,952
of ordinary skill in the art of electrolyzing water would have
used the teaching of Sobieralski regarding the equivalency of
cathode materials in the production of zinc and substituted these
equivalents in the process of Timewell. Furthermore, the
examiner has not presented any evidence or reasoning why one of
ordinary skill in this art would have substituted an isotopic
hydrogen storage cathode for the aluminum of Timewell, when there
is no evidence on this record that aluminum is an isotopic
hydrogen storage material (see the Brief, page 30).
For the foregoing reasons and those stated in the Brief and
Reply Brief, we determine that the examiner has not established a
prima facie case of obviousness in view of the reference
evidence. Accordingly, we reverse the examiner’s rejection under
35 U.S.C. § 103 over Timewell in combination with either
Sobieralski or Pons.
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007