Appeal No. 2001-0319
Application 09/005,841
teaching of Ahmad that the metal oxides can be replaced by metal
carbides (col. 7, lines 14-19).
Appellants argue that the rejection is erroneous for the
same reasons as the first group of claims: Ahmad fails to
describe expressly or by example any capacitor structure that is
asymmetrical with respect to the electrical conductivities of
anode and cathode coatings, and Ahmad fails to point to any
specific combinations of different cathode and anode coating
materials (Br15). Appellants note that the metal carbide of
Example 24 does not teach one of ordinary skill in the art to
replace only one of the oxide coated electrodes of Examples 1-22
with a carbide coated electrode (Br15-16).
We agree that Ahmad fails to point to any specific
combinations of different cathode and anode coating materials,
such as a carbide cathode coating and an oxide anode coating of
the recited metals. For this reason, we find that Ahmad does not
anticipate claims 28 and 35. The anticipation rejection of
claims 28-30 and 35 is reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007