Appeal 207-1263
Application 10/480,198
According to Appellants, the invention is directed to a non-reducing
ceramic characterized by a perovskite crystal phase containing 55 mole % or
more of strontium titanate and an accessory phase containing all other
crystal phases, with the ratio of the accessory crystal phase powder CuKα
X-ray diffraction pattern maximum peak intensity at 2θ = 25° to 35° to that
of the perovskite crystal phase being less than 5% (Br. 4). Independent
claim 12 is illustrative of the invention and a copy of this claim is
reproduced below:
12. A nonreducing dielectric ceramic comprising a perovskite
principal crystal phase containing 55 mole percent or more of SrTiO3 and an
accessory crystal phase containing all the crystal phases other than the
perovskite crystal phase, wherein the ratio of the accessory crystal powder
CuKą X-ray diffraction pattern maximum peak intensity at 2θ = 25º to 35º to
that of the perovskite crystal phase is less than 5%.
The Examiner has relied on the following prior art references as
evidence of unpatentability:
Kojima US 6,118,648 Sep. 12, 2000
Fujii US 6,329,311 B1 Dec. 11, 2001
Fukui US 6,656,863 B2 Dec. 02, 2003
ISSUES ON APPEAL
Claims 12-26 and 30-32 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as
anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Fukui or Fujii or Kojima (Answer 3).1
1 For purposes of judicial economy, we have grouped the three separate
rejections on page 3 of the Answer into one alternative rejection since the
claims and issues involved in each rejection are the same (see also Br. 5,
section VI). We note that the only difference is that the rejections over
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013