Appeal No. 2003-2136 Page 14
Application No. 09/562,952
11 x 10-6/°C. The appellants failed to prove to the contrary. At the oral hearing, the
appellants' attorney admitted not knowing whether the resultant bond suggested by the
references would have featured the claimed ranges of melting points and linear
expansion coefficients. Therefore, we affirm the rejection of claim 7 and of claims 8-15
and 17, which fall therewith.
B. CLAIM 16
The examiner admits that "[n]either Oshima '98 nor Osamura specify the specific
welding parameters for welding iridium alloy tips to a flat surface of a center electrode."
(Examiner's Answer at 7.) Attempting to remedy the omission, the examiner asserts,
"since Matsutani, column 2, line 43, states welding energies of from 5 to 7.5 Joules for
welding a platinum-iridium alloy, a slightly higher welding energy for welding the iridium-
rhodium chip to a flat surface of the center electrode of Oshima '98 as above modified
would have been expected since the chip alloy has a higher melting point." (Id. at 7.)
The appellants argue, "Matsutani relates to an assembly that differs structurally from the
combination claimed by applicant and therefore the skilled artisan would not 'obviously'
adopt the parameters taught in Matsutani in the Oshima/Oshima/Osamura
combination." (Appeal Br. at 13.)
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007