Appeal 2007-0612
Application 09/838,866
ll. 56-61; col. 4, ll. 7-14). Eom teaches that “the horseshoe must be excellent in
abrasion resistance and shock absorption and ductile enough to change its shape a
little so as to suit the diverse sizes and forms of the hooves at the Lime [sic, time]
of fitting on the hoof” (col. 1, ll. 27-31). Eom discloses that the alloy is abundant
in ductility and, therefore, easily fitted on the hoof (col. 3, ll. 8-10).
Weaver discloses a metal matrix composite formed from a molten metal
selected from the group consisting of aluminum, magnesium, titanium and
mixtures thereof, and particles of a silicon boride composition selected from the
group consisting of silicon tetraboride and silicon hexaboride, the silicon boride
composition being present in a range of about 0.1 to about 80 wt% in the metal
(col. 3, ll. 14-20). Weaver teaches (col. 1, ll. 19-25):
The light weight metals of aluminum and
magnesium have very large markets for they are utilized
in a wide variety of industries. In a lesser way, titanium
is also utilized as a light weight fabrication metal. These
metals suffer from some drawbacks, however, which
limit their usefulness. These include low stiffness (low
modulus of elasticity), high thermal coefficient of
expansion, and low strength.
Weaver discloses that his silicon boride composition is a strengthening agent
(col. 1, ll. 53-55; col. 2, ll. 3-10) and that his metal matrix composite has “desired
modulus of elasticity, coefficient of expansion and strength” (col. 2, ll. 14-15).
The Appellant acknowledges that Weaver’s metal matrix composite is the metal
matrix composite from which the Appellant’s horseshoe is made (Spec. 2:13-15).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013