Appeal 2007-2236
Application 10/991,738
1 thickness of at least about 0.5 micrometers, and we are not quite sure what
2 "about" means, we cannot be certain that the film described in Example X
3 falls within the scope of claim 89.
4 Example XI is the first example we come to which appears to
5 describe an article within the scope of claim 89. The film is made from a
6 carboxylate salt of yttrium, a carboxylate salt of barium and a non-
7 halogenated salt of copper. Layer 14 resulting from the process is described
8 as having a thickness of "about 0.5 micrometers" and a critical current
9 density of about 3.2 x 106 amperes per square centimeter. Publication
10 ¶ 0187.
11 Example XII describes an article made from the right ingredients and
12 has a critical current density within the scope of claim 89, but not a thickness
13 within claim 89. The thickness described in Example XII is 0.3 micrometers
14 whereas claim 89 requires a thickness of about 0.5 micrometers. Publication
15 ¶¶ 0188 through 0193.
16 Example XIII is the second example which appears to describe an
17 article within the scope of claim 89. Example XIII describes an article made
18 from the right ingredients, having a thickness of 0.8 micrometers (within the
19 scope of claim 89) and a critical current density of 3.8 x 106 (also within the
20 scope of claim 89). Publication ¶¶ 0194 through 0195.
21 Example XIV does not describe any critical current density and
22 therefore we cannot tell whether any article described in the example falls
23 within the scope of claim 89. Publication ¶¶ 0196 through 0200.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013