Appeal No. 1999-1748
Application 08/846,285
The examiner should evaluate the patentability of
appellants’ method claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based upon the
acknowledged prior art methods converting exothermic weld metal
material to weld metal (appellants’ specification, pages 1
through 3) and the teaching of Dahn.
The examiner should review dependent article claim 23 and
ascertain whether the method recitation “is punched and shaped”
imparts to the “perforation distortion” structure a
characteristic that distinguishes the perforation distortion from
the pin holes effected by the removal of the beads of Dahn.
The examiner may also consider remedying the following
perceived informalities. Claim 22 appears to redundantly recite
a perforation when a “perforation” distortion is set forth in
claim 19. As to holes having “substantially equal”
characteristics (claim 37), they appear to be the same as holes
having “unequal” characteristics (claim 38).
13
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007