Appeal 2007-0501
Application 10/747,956
employed (id.). The Examiner contends that Popoola and Shimajiri are cited
to teach the particle size, and it would have been obvious to subject
potassium fluorozincate to additional process steps determined by routine
experimentation, such as pulverizing processes, to obtain the desired particle
size dependent on the method of applying the fluxing agent (id. 7-8 and 9).
The Examiner contends potassium fluorozincate is analogous to potassium
fluoroaluminate as disclosed by Lauzon at column 1, lines 5-11, and as
disclosed in the secondary references (id. 8). The Examiner contends the
disclosure in the references of a method of selection and order of combining
reagents to prepare potassium fluorozincate to obtain certain particle sizes
without a pulverizing step is not necessary to reject the claims, as a product
and not the method of making that product is claimed (id. 10). The
Examiner contends the range of particle sizes disclosed by Popoola
encompasses or overlaps with the ranges claimed in claims 8, 10, and 11,
and the range of particle sizes disclosed by Shimajiri falls within the range
claimed in claim 12 (id. 10-12).
Appellants reply the Examiner fails to account for the compositional
differences between the claimed alkali metal fluorozincate particles and the
potassium aluminum fluoride flux particles of Popoola, resulting in
“different properties including, inter alia, solid-liquid surface tension,
wettability, solubility and/or particle-particle interaction, all of which will
determine how such particles interact with a liquid spray media” (Reply Br.
2). Appellants contend the particle sizes of potassium fluoride and
aluminum fluoride mixtures in Shimajiri provides fluxes that are floatable in
a furnace, which “would depend on other compositionally-dependent
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013