Ex Parte MOYNIHAN et al - Page 11




              Appeal No. 2002-2184                                                                                      
              Application No. 08/406,297                                                                                


              are not `evidence."' In re Dembiczak, 175 F.3d 994, 999, 50 USPQ2d 1614, 1617.                            
              "Mere denials and conclusory statements, however, are not sufficient to establish a                       
              genuine issue of material fact." Dembiczak, 175 F.3d at 999, 50 USPQ2d at 1617,                           
              citing McElmurry v. Arkansas Power & Light Co., 995 F.2d 1576, 1578, 27 USPQ2d                            
              1129, 1131 (Fed. Cir. 1993) .                                                                             
                     With respect to independent claim 1, appellants argue that Gordon does not                         
              teach or suggest the use of a continuous body of carbon as recited in the claim                           
              language.  (See brief at page 33.)  We agree with appellants.  The examiner maintains                     
              that with respect to the use of a “diamond quartz”, Gordon, III teaches such at column                    
              2.  The examiner maintains that since Gordon, III suggest the use of diamond quartz,  it                  
              would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to               
              use diamond which is a natural corrosion resistant form of carbon.  We disagree with                      
              the examiner interpretation of the teachings of Gordon, III.  While the examiner finds                    
              the word “diamond” in this reference, appellants argue that it does not appear to refer to                
              a hard carbon substance, but to a form of quartz which is not actually a diamond and                      
              therefore is not pure carbon.  (See brief at page 34.)  We agree with appellants.                         
              Additionally, appellants included evidence that the use of various types of quartz may                    






                                                          11                                                            





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007