Appeal No. 2006-1064 Page 4
Application No. 10/170,684
The Examiner asserts that Kenny renders obvious the subject matter of
independent claim 1. 3 Claim 1 is directed to a process for producing a lightweight
molded part metal foam part comprising voids that have a monomodal distribution of
their dimensions. The claim further specifies that the metal foam is introduced into a
casting die where it is subject to compressing under essentially all-round pressure.
The portions of the Kenny reference identified by the Examiner for describing the
features of the claimed invention are incorrect. While the reference discloses the
production of foamed metal parts having uniform pore size, the reference does not
disclose that the pores (voids) that have a monomodal distribution of their dimensions.
The disclosure in the reference that the pores have uniform size does not necessarily
indicate or suggest that the pores have a monomodal distribution of their dimensions.
Accordingly, we agree with Appellants, Brief pages 12-17, that the Examiner has failed
to establish a prima facie case of obviousness of the subject matter.
The Examiner added the teaching of Jin ‘697 to the Kenny reference to reject the
subject matter of claims 6-8, 16 and 17. The addition of the teachings of the Jin ‘697
reference does not remedy the differences from the independent claim 1 and the Kenny
reference identified above.
3 We will limit our discussion to claim 1 is the sole independent claim.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007