Appeal 2007-0136
Application 90/006,222
of the rejected claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as having been
obvious.3 The appellant (BHI) has elected to contest only the rejection of
the independent claims, so the dependent claims stand or fall with claims 1
and 19.4 The examiner relies on a patent (Newman)5 as evidence of
obviousness in rejecting claims 1 and 19. We affirm the rejection.
CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
Claims 1 and 19 define the subject matter on appeal as follows:6
1. An improved, wear-resistant hardfacing composition
comprising the following materials in pre-application ratios:
at least 60% by weight of the composition being granules
including a quantity of sintered carbide pellets and a quantity of
cast carbide pellets, the cast and sintered carbides being
selected from one of the group of carbides consisting of
chromium, molybdenum, niobium, tantalum, titanium, tungsten,
and vanadium carbides and alloys and mixtures thereof, the
sintered carbide pellets and the cast carbide pellets being
generally spherical in configuration; and
the balance of the hardfacing composition being matrix
metal.
19. An improved, wear-resistant hardfacing composition
comprising the following materials in pre-application ratios:
a quantity of sintered carbide pellets and a quantity of
cast carbide pellets, the cast and sintered carbides being
selected from one of the group of carbides consisting of
chromium, molybdenum, niobium, tantalum, titanium, tungsten
3 Ans. 3; see the note at Ans. 4 explaining that basis of the rejection for
claims 1 and 6 has changed from 35 U.S.C. 102 to §103 in view of an
amendment.
4 Appeal brief (Br.) 5.
5 H.C. Newman and H.E. Kelley, "Arc Hardfacing Rod", U.S.
Patent 5,250,355 (granted 1993).
6 The claim language is reproduced from the claims appendix to the appeal
brief.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013