Appeal No. 2005-1439
Application No. 09/943,987
and 8-12 stand or fall with the patentability of claim 1, the rejection of claims 2-6 and 8-12
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Diamond is also affirmed.
D. Rejection of claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
Claim 7 reads as follows:
7. The alloy of claim 1 in the form of a jewelry casting, a stamping, a wire
or a sheet.
The appellant argues that there is "no hint" in Diamond that the constructions recited in
claim 7 could be made from 22 karat gold alloys. See Brief, p. 8.
To the contrary, Diamond expressly states that the disclosed invention contemplates
gold alloys ranging from 8 karat to 22 karat and indicates that the disclosed gold alloys are
particularly suited for the casting of jewelry articles such as rings, bracelets, earrings, and the
like. See Abstract; col. 2, lines 13-15; see also claim 5 of Diamond (reciting gold alloys,
including 22 karat gold alloys, "suitable for investment casting of articles of jewelry").
Therefore, the rejection of claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Diamond is affirmed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007