Appeal No. 2002-1284 3
Application No. 09/098,730
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 10, 11, and 18 through 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§103(a) as being unpatentable over Mase in view of Suzuki.
OPINION
We have carefully considered all of the arguments advanced by the appellants and
the examiner and agree with the examiner that the rejection of the claims under §103(a) is
well founded. Accordingly, we affirm the rejection.
As an initial matter, it is the appellants’ position that, “[a]ll claims stand or fall
together.” See Brief, page 4. Accordingly, we select claim 1, a broad generic claim as
representative of the claimed subject matter and limit our consideration thereto. See 37
CFR §1.192(c)(7) (2001).
The Rejection under § 103(a)
It is the appellants’ position that, “the combination of Mase and Suzuki does not
appear to yield the claimed invention.” See Brief, page 6. We disagree.
We find that Mase is directed to an oxygen sensor utilized to determine the
concentration of an exhaust gas from internal combustion engines of automobiles. See
Mase, column 1, lines 14-18. We find that Mase teaches layers corresponding to the
claimed boundary layers which are preferably ceramic layers of alumina or spinel which is
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007