Appeal 2007-2210
Application 10/711,154
an yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal substrate;
a coating of alumina deposited on the substrate, said coating
being deposited by ion beam assisted deposition in the presence
of the substrate; and
wherein said coating has a total porosity of less than about 1.0
percent.
The Examiner relies on the following references in rejecting the
appealed subject matter:
Toibana US 4,507,224 Mar. 26, 1985
Hida US 5,192,720 Mar. 9, 1993
Schubert, "Surface Stabilization of Y-TZP," British Ceramic Proceedings
34, 157-60 (1984).
Claims 1-4, 13, and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Schubert in view of Hida; and claim 5 stands rejected
under 35 USC §103(a) as unpatentable over Schubert in view of Hida and
further in view of Toibana.
We REVERSE.
The Examiner bears the initial burden of presenting a prima facie
case of obviousness. In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d
1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In order to establish a prima facie case of
obviousness, the Examiner must show that each and every limitation of the
claim is described or suggested by the prior art or would have been
obvious based on the knowledge of those of ordinary skill in the art. In re
Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988)).
“[R]ejections on obviousness grounds cannot be sustained by mere
conclusory statements; instead, there must be some articulated reasoning
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013