Appeal No. 2003-0210
Application 03/237,574
Rejection of claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over
Robinson, Boller or Eubank, in view of Corson
For the reasons given above regarding the rejections under
35 U.S.C. § 102(a), the Rule 131 has removed Robinson and Boller
as references as to claim 6.
Eubank discloses in example 6 a uranium rod coated in a bath
containing about 46.5 wt% copper, 52.5% tin and 1% nickel
(col. 3, lines 68-75). The invention disclosure documents relied
upon in the Rule 131 declaration do not show possession of this
alloy by the appellants. However, the knowledge requirement of
35 U.S.C. § 102(a) is that the claimed invention must be known by
others in this country before the applicant’s invention. Because
the disclosure in Eubank’s example 6 is his own invention and
Eubank is one of the inventors in the present application, it is
impossible for the knowledge indicated by that example to precede
the invention of the subject matter in claim 6 of the present
application. Thus, Eubank is not available as a reference under
35 U.S.C. § 102(a) as to the appellants’ claim 6.
Moreover, Corson discloses adding to the components of
bronze up to 0.3% phosphorous and up to 3% nickel, to form at
least some grains of nickel phosphide as a hard constituent
(page 1, line 48 - page 2, line 13). The examiner argues that
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007