Ex Parte KADOMURA et al - Page 7



          Appeal No. 2002-1401                                                        
          Application No. 09/187/226                                                  
                                  Claims 13 and 14                                    
               The appellants’ claim 13 requires that the pore ratio of the           
          composite material is minimized by using aluminum nitride                   
          particles having first and second particle sizes, wherein the               
          particles having the first particle size, R, are present in                 
          3-5 times the volume concentration of the particles having the              
          second particle size, 3R to 5R.                                             
               The appellants argue that Premkumar “is silent regarding the           
          particle size that should provide the advantages of successfully            
          controlling the porosity of the composite material or base                  
          material” (brief, page 14).                                                 
               Actually, Premkumar discloses that substantially porosity              
          free metal matrix composites can be produced by using particles             
          having a distribution of sizes so as to obtain interstitial                 
          filling (col. 5, lines 54-63).  This disclosure of interstitial             
          filling would have indicated to one of ordinary skill in the art            
          that the small particles, which fill in the spaces between the              
          large particles, must be present in a relatively large volume               
          fraction.  Given this disclosure, the optimum relative sizes and            
          volumes of the particles recited in the appellants’ claim 13                
          would have been determinable by one of ordinary skill in the art            

          aluminum-silicon alloy (col. 2, lines 42-44) is the same or                 
          substantially the same as that obtained by mixing the appellants’           
          silicon lumps with the aluminum base material, and the appellants           
          have provided no evidence or argument to the contrary.                      
                                       Page 7                                         





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007