Appeal No. 2002-0895
Application No. 09/402,552
claimed, in the process suggested by Boxall and Mills to obtain a
desired titanium diboride coating. This is especially true in
this case since as indicated supra, Gruenr teaches that plasma
spray particles having the claimed sizes, i.e., 10 to 25 microns,
are useful for forming a desired titanium diboride coating having
the claimed thickness. See also the Answer, page 8.
The appellants argue that the prior art references do not
teach or suggest a titanium diboride coating having a porosity of
not more than 10% by volume. See the Brief, page 4. According
to the appellants (the specification, page 6),
the porosity should be at most 10% by volume . . . .
Preference is given to a porosity of from 4 to 6% by
volume, since here the pores do not allow bonding
between substrate and medium even at relatively low
layer thicknesses . . . .
We find that Boxall teaches that it is desirable to form a
spray powder coating of titanium diboride on studs made of, e.g.,
a stainless steel material. See, e.g., column 3, lines 35-40.
We find that Boxall states that “a non-porous or impervious
coating is most desirable.” See column 3, lines 40-42. We find
that Boxall subsequently bonds titanium diboride to stainless
steel materials in the form of a coating using a plasma spraying
technique. See column 4, lines 15-52. We find that Boxall does
not suffer from any bonding problem. See Boxall in its entirety.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007