Appeal No. 2003-0208 Page 12
Application No. 08/578,996
recitation in claim 3 that the metallic chromium is caused to be in an intercrystal grain
boundary of the CrN and Cr2N is inherent in the coating suggested by the combined
teachings of Takiguchi and Komuro.
The appellants argue (brief, pp. 14-16) that causing the metallic chromium to be
in the intercrystal grain boundary of the CrN and Cr2N in the amount required (i.e., more
than 0.5 and not more than 15.0 weight percent) is not inherent in the coating taught by
Takiguchi or the coating suggested by the combined teachings of Takiguchi and
Komuro. The appellants also argue (brief, pp. 6-8 and 13-14; reply brief, pp. 2-5) that
the declaration of Motonubu Onoda establishes unexpected results for the subject
matter of claim 3. We agree with the appellants that when the examiner's evidence of
obviousness and the declaration of Motonubu Onoda are properly weighed, the subject
matter of claim 3 would not have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
In that regard, we note that while the above-quoted method of Takiguchi would
appear to provide some metallic chromium to be in the intercrystal grain boundary of
the chromium nitride when the chromium nitride is a mixture of Cr2N and CrN, the
amount of chromium in that mixture is not specified. The examiner has not set forth
any scientific basis as to why the wear resistant plated deposition coating mixture
suggested by the combined teachings of Takiguchi and Komuro would inherently cause
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007