Appeal No. 2003-1796 Page 4
Application No. 09/513,563
The appellants argue that the applied prior art does not suggest a disk comprised
of a fiber induced composite ceramic material comprising alumina and having a hardness
of at least 12 GPa and a fracture toughness of at least 3.8 MPa - m½. We agree. It is
our determination that even if it would have been obvious at the time the invention was
made to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Dunbar and Rudoi in the
manner set forth by the examiner in the rejection before us in this appeal, such would not
result in the claimed invention since such would not result in a disk comprised of a fiber
induced composite ceramic material comprising alumina. Thus, the examiner has not
established the obviousness of the subject matter of claims 1 and 23 to 25. Accordingly,
the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1 and 23 to 25 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is
reversed.
Claims 5 to 7 and 26 to 28
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 5 to 7 and 26 to 28 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103.
The appellants argue that the applied prior art does not suggest a disk comprised
of a fiber induced composite ceramic material comprising alumina and toughened
metallic oxide composite. We agree. It is our determination that even if it would have
been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person of ordinary skill in the art to
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007