Appeal No. 2000-0119
Application 08/785,711
process yield extremely finely divided ceramic particles that are
“essentially colloidal in dimension, or essentially micron to
colloidal in size” (col. 2, lines 44-49). In our view, the
teachings of the references relied upon by the examiner, when
considered as a whole, would have led one of ordinary skill in
the art away from attempting any such modification of the process
in Rosinski. Thus, we will not sustain the examiner’s rejection
of claims 8, 9, 11, 13 and 14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
It follows from the foregoing that the decision of the
examiner is REVERSED.
However, pursuant to our authority under 37 CFR
§ 1.196(b), we enter the following new ground of rejection
against claims 8, 9 and 13.
Claims 8, 9 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over the combined teachings of
Grube and the Robinson article. In addition to the mold core
removal and municipal waste fragmentation processes of Grube
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007