Appeal No. 2000-0119
Application 08/785,711
Independent claim 8 is representative of the subject
matter on appeal and reads as follows:
8. A process for the production [of] fragmented
ceramic which comprises:
a) impregnating a porous ceramic material having a porosity of
from 10 to 80% by volume with a fluid such that the pores of the
ceramic are at least partially occupied by the fluid; and
b) causing the fluid to expand rapidly without chemical change
such that the expansion causes fragmentation of the ceramic
material.
The prior art references relied upon by the examiner in
rejecting the appealed claims are:
Rosinski 3,715,983 Feb. 13, 1973
Grube et al. (Grube) 4,540,467 Sep. 10, 1985
In addition to the foregoing, this merits panel of the
Board has relied upon the following prior art reference in a new
ground of rejection entered under 37 CFR § 1.196(b):
Gilbert C. Robinson, “The Relationship Between Pore Structure and
Durability of Brick,” 63 Ceramic Bulletin, no. 2, 295-300 (1984)
Claims 8, 9, 11, 13 and 14 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Rosinski in view
of Grube.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007