In re Thompson

Appellants filed an application for a patent for “new and useful improvements in a Corrosion-Resistant Metallic Article and Method of Making the Same.”

The Primary Examiner rejected claims 1 to 9 inclusive and 11 to 15 inclusive, all of the claims in the case. Some of the claims he rejected in view of prior art, which it is not necessary to set out in view of the issue here. Other claims he rejected as being indefinite and “broader than the disclosure warrants with respect to the metal which is treated.” In this connection the_examiner stated only that

The substances recited in lines 5 and 6 of…