Appeal No. 2002-1116
Application No. 09/213,544
On page 5 of the brief, appellant indicates that the claims
stand or fall together, and we therefore consider claim 1 in
this appeal. 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7)(2000).
The examiner relies upon the following reference as
evidence of unpatentability:
Mototani et al. (Mototani) 5,482,798 Jan. 09, 1996
Claims 1-13 and 15-21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being unpatentable over Mototani.1
OPINION
For the reasons set forth in the answer and below, we
affirm the rejection.
On page 3 of the answer, the examiner finds that Mototani
discloses alkaline manganese batteries containing manganese
dioxide and expanded graphite, and refers to column 3, lines 40-
52 of Mototani. The examiner recognizes that Mototani does not
disclose the kerosene absorption values of the disclosed
expanded graphite.
In the paragraph bridging pages 3-4 of the answer, the
examiner states that Mototani teaches that expanded graphites
may be formed from a variety of graphitic starting materials,
including artificial graphite, naturally occurring graphite, and
flaky graphite, and the examiner refers to column 5, line 24
through column 6, line 3 of Mototani.
We agree with the examiner’s findings as described above.
We also refer to example 1 found in column 3 of Mototani
wherein the manner in which the battery is prepared is set
1 We do not include claim 14 in this rejection because claim 14 has
been canceled. See Paper No. 8 (the amendment filed on October 19,
2000).
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007