Appeal No. 2004-1043
Application No. 09/960,907
Beck, Weaver and Berclaz teach methods and apparatuses
for electrolytically producing aluminum using electrolytic
cells. Each of the references provides a source of heat to
control the temperature of the electrolyte and also the
capability to apply an electric current. One of ordinary
skill in the art recognizes that methods are capable of
being used in other apparatuses and that a rearrangement of
parts to achieve the same result is obvious. More
particularly, the references of Weaver and Berclaz provide
clear motivation for modifying the method of Beck. Beck,
Weaver and Berdaz all teach, the method of electrolytically
producing aluminum, and in each case, the apparatus of each
reference is capable of using the method of the other
because they recognize the need to supply a current to the
cell and to provide a heat source to control the
temperature of the electrolyte. Therefore, the fair
teachings of the references teach and suggest the
intermittent operation of an electrolytic cell and the
application of heat to the bottom of the cell.
iv. Beck et al. ago not provide parts missing (XII.G,
pages 33-35)
Appellant states, "Beck et al. ‘701 does not provide
parts missing in the Beck Paper, Weaver and Berclaz (see
Appellant’s Brief, p. 33, third paragraph). This statement
applies to the metallic liner.
The Beck paper teaches the use of a metallic liner
(see Beck paper, p. 359, col. 1). The reference of Beck et
al. was relied upon to disclose the desirable size of
aluminum particles used in electrolytic aluminum production
cells. Therefore, since the Beck paper teaches Appellant’s
33
Page: Previous 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007