Skip to main content

Full text of "USPTO Patents Application 08479810"

See other formats


DEC 0 1 1006 & 

*T**B0>£r ,N THE UN,TED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 



For: NEW SUPERCONDUCTIVE COMPOUNDS HAVING HIGH TRANSITION 
TEMPERATURE, METHODS FOR THEIR USE AND PREPARATION 

Commissioner for Patents 

United States Patent and Trademark Office 

P.O. Box 1450 

Alexandria, VA 22313-1450 



APPEAL BRIEF 
PartV 

CFR37 §41.37(c)(1)(v) 
Summary of Claimed Subject Matter 

Summary of Each Claim Under Appeal 



In re Patent Application of 
Applicants: Bednorz et al. 
Serial No.: 08/479,810 
Filed: June 7, 1995 



Group Art Unit: 1751 
Examiner: M. Kopec 



Date: November 27, 2006 



Docket: YO987-074BZ 



VOLUME 2 



Volume 2 



Page 1 of 199 



The term "original claims" refers to the claims filed in the first filed 
ancestral application, Appl. No. Application Serial Number 07/053,307 filed 
05/22/87 (Brief Attachment AU). Summary of the following claims: 1,12. 24, 27, 
34, 36, 40, 42, 46, 55, 57, 58, 59, 64, 69, 77, 84, 86, 71, 93, 96, 103, 109, 123, 
130, 135, 137, 139, 140, 361, 373, 374, 379, 383, 386, 438, 496, 497, 535, 543; 

includes the modifications made in the Thirteenth Supplemental Response 
submitted 1 1/25/2006 (unentered at the time of submission of this Brief) to use 
the terms "current source" and "temperature controller" used in allowed claims. 
Summary of the following claims: 218, 222, 229, 309, 313, 320, 466, 476, 517, 
522, 467, 477, 5128 and 523 include the correction of the typographical errors 
mode in the Thirteenth Supplemental Response submitted 11/25/2006 
(unentered at the time of submission of this Brief). 



CLAIM 1 

Independent CLAIM 1 is directed to a superconducting apparatus comprising a 
composition having a transition temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, the 
composition including a rare earth or rare earth-like element, a transition metal 
element capable of exhibiting multivalent states and oxygen, including at least 
one phase that exhibits superconductivity at temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K, a temperature controller for maintaining the composition at the temperature 
to exhibit the superconductivity and a current source for passing an electrical 
superconducting current through the composition while exhibiting the 
superconductivity. 

Support for claim 1 is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 
(pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 
(pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 (pages 49-50),84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 
54) (of the specification), the title at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 
elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 21 , at 
page 20 line 1 to page 21, line 2 and page 18, line 20. Support is in the 



Volume 2 



Page 2 of 199 



specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the paragraph bridging 
pages 2 and 3. 

CLAIMS 2 

Dependent CLAIM 2 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 1 , 
further including an alkaline earth element substituted for at least one atom of the 
rare earth or rare earth-like element in the composition. 

Support is found in original claim 2 at page 29 of the specification. 

CLAIM 3 

Dependent CLAIM 3 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 2, 
where the transition metal is Cu at page 29 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 3 at page 30 of the specification. 

CLAIM 4 

Dependent CLAIM 4 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 3, 
where the alkaline earth element is selected from the group consisting of B, Ca, 
Ba, and Sr. 

Support is found in original claim 4 at page 30 of the specification. 

CLAIM 5 

Dependent CLAIM 5 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 1, 
where the transition metal element is selected from the group consisting of Cu, Ni, 
and Cr. 



Volume 2 



Page 3 of 199 




Support is found in original claim 5 at page 30 of the specification. 

CLAIM 6 

Dependent CLAIM 6 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 2, 
where the rare earth or rare earth-like element is selected from the group 
consisting of La, Nd, and Ce. 

Support is found in original claim 6 at page 30 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 4 of 199 



CLAIM 7 



Dependent CLAIM 7 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 1 , 
where the phase is crystalline with a perovskite-like structure. 

Support is found in original claim 7 at page 30 of the specification. 
Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 8 

Dependent CLAIM 8 is directed the superconducting apparatus of claim 2, where 
the phase is crystalline with a perovskite-like structure. 

Support is found in original claim 8 at page 30 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Volume 2 



Page 5 of 199 



CLAIM 9 



Dependent CLAIM 9 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 1 , 
where the phase exhibits a layer-like crystalline structure. 

Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 10 

Dependent CLAIM 10 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 1 , 
where the phase is a mixed copper oxide phase. 

Support is found in original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

CLAIM 11 

Dependent CLAIM 1 1 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 1 , 
where the composition is comprised of mixed oxides with alkaline earth doping. 

Support is found in original claim 1 1 at page 31 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 6 of 199 



r 





CLAIM 12 



Independent CLAIM 12 is directed to a superconducting combination, 
comprising a superconductive oxide having a transition temperature greater than 
or equal to.26°K, 

a current source for passing a superconducting electrical current through the 
composition while the composition is at a temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K and less than the transition temperature, and 

a temperature controller for cooling the composition to a superconducting state at 
a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K. 

Support for claim 12 is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 
(pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 
(pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), ), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 
to 54) (of the specification), the title at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 
elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 21 , at 
page 20 line 1 to page 21 , line 2, and page 18, line 20. Support is in the 
specification at page 4, lines 10-21; page 23, line 1-9; and the paragraph bridging 
pages 2 and 3. 



Dependent CLAIM 13 is directed to the combination of claim 12, where the 
superconductive composition includes a transition metal oxide. 

Support is found in original claim 13 at page 31 of the specification 



CLAIM 13 



Volume 2 



Page 7 of 199 



CLAIM 14 



Dependent CLAIM 14 is directed to the combination of claim 12, where the 
superconductive composition includes Cu-oxide. 

Support id found in original claim 14 at page 32 of the specification. 

CLAIM 15 

Dependent CLAIM 15 is directed to the combination of claim 12, where the 
superconductive composition includes a multivalent transition metal, oxygen, and 
at least one additional element. 

Support is found in original claim 15 at page 32 of the specification. 

CLAIM 16 

Dependent CLAIM 16 is directed to the combination of claim 15, where the 
transition metal is Cu. 

Support is found in found in original claim 16 at page 32 of the specification. 

CLAIM 17 

Dependent CLAIM 17 is directed to the combination of claim 15, where the 
additional element is a rare earth or rare earth-like element. 

Support is found in original claim 17 at page 32 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 8 of 199 




CLAIM 18 



Dependent CLAIM 18 is directed to the combination of claim 15, where the 
additional element is an alkaline earth element. 

Support is found in original claim 18 at page 32 of the specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 19 is directed to the combination of claim 12, where the 
composition includes a perovskite-like superconducting phase. 

Support is found in original claim 19 at page 32 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Dependent CLAIM 20 is directed to the combination of claim 12, where the 
composition includes a substituted transition metal oxide at page 33 of the 
specification. 

Support is found in original claim 20 at page 33 of the specification. 



CLAIM 19 



CLAIM 20 



Volume 2 



Page 9 of 199 



CLAIM 21 



Dependent CLAIM 21 is directed to the combination of claim 20, where the 
substituted transition metal oxide includes a multivalent transition metal element. 

Support can be found in original claim 21 at page 33 of the specification. 

CLAIM 22 

Dependent CLAIM 22 is directed to the combination of claim 20, where the 
substituted transition metal oxide is an oxide of copper. 

Support is found in original claim 22 at page 33 of the specification. 

CLAIM 23 

Dependent CLAIM 23 is directed to the combination of claim 20, where the 
substituted transition metal oxide has a layer-like structure. 

Support is found in original claim 23 at page 33 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Volume 2 



Page 10 of 199 





CLAIM 24 



Independent CLAIM 24 is directed to an apparatus comprising: 

a transition metal oxide having a phase therein which exhibits a superconducting 
state at a critical temperature greater than or equal to of 26°K, 

a temperature controller for lowering the temperature of the material at least to 
the critical temperature to produce the superconducting state in the phase, and 

a current source for passing an electrical superconducting current through the 
transition metal oxide while it is in the superconducting state. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), ), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, and page 18, line 20. Support is in the 
specification at page 4, lines 10-21; page 23, line 1-9; and the paragraph bridging 
pages 2 and 3. 



Dependent CLAIM 25 is directed to the apparatus of claim 24, where the 
transition metal oxide is comprised of a transition metal capable of exhibiting 
multivalent states. 

Support is found in original claim 25 at page 34 of the specification. 



CLAIM 25 



Volume 2 



Page 11 of 199 



CLAIM 26 



Dependent CLAIM 26 is directed to the apparatus of claim 24, where the 
transition metal oxide is comprised of a Cu oxide. 

Support is found in original claim 26 at page 34 of the specification. 

CLAIM 27 

Independent CLAIM 27 is directed to a superconducting apparatus comprising a 
composition having a transition temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, the 
composition being a substituted Cu-oxide including a superconducting phase 
having a structure which is structurally substantially similar to the orthorhombic- 
tetragonal phase of the composition, a temperature controller for maintaining the 
composition at a temperature greater than or equal to the transition temperature 
to put the composition in a superconducting state; and a current source for 
passing current through the composition while in the superconducting state. 

Support is found in original claim 27 at page 34 of the specification and in original 
claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 
58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 
84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the title at page 1 of 
the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description 
at page 4, lines 1 0 to 21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, and page 18, line 
20. Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and 
the paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 



Volume 2 



Page 12 of 199 



CLAIM 28 



Dependent CLAIM 28 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 27, 
where the substituted Cu-oxide includes a rare earth or rare earth-like element. 

Support is found in original claim 28 at pages 29 to 30 of the specification. 

CLAIM 29 

Dependent CLAIM 29 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 27, 
where the substituted Cu-oxide includes an alkaline earth element. 

Support is found in original claim 29 at page 35 of the specification. 

CLAIM 30 

Dependent CLAIM 30 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 29, 
where the alkaline earth element is atomically large with respect to Cu. 

Support is found in original claim 30 at page 35 of the specification. 

CLAIM 31 

Dependent CLAIM 31 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 27, 
where the composition has a crystalline structure which enhances electron- 
phonon interactions to produce superconductivity at a temperature greater than 
or equal to 26°K. 

Support is found in original claim 31 at page 35 of the specification and at page 
18, line 20 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 13 of 199 



CLAIM 32 

Dependent CLAIM 32 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 31 , 
where the crystalline structure is layer-like, enhancing the number of Jahn-Teller 
polarons in the composition. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 33 

Independent CLAIM 33 is directed to a superconducting apparatus comprising a 
composition having a superconducting onset temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K, the composition being comprised of a copper oxide doped with an 
alkaline earth element where the concentration of the alkaline earth element is 
near to the concentration of the alkaline earth element where the 
superconducting copper oxide phase in the composition undergoes an 
orthorhombic to tetragonal structural phase transition. 

Support is found in original claim 33 at pages 35-36 of the specification and in 
original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 
(page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 
(pages 49-50), ), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the 
title at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and 



Volume 2 



Page 14 of 199 





the description at page 4, lines 10 to 21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, and 
page 18, line 20. 



Independent CLAIM 34 is directed to a superconducting apparatus having a 
superconducting onset temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, the 
composition being comprised of a mixed copper oxide doped with an element 
chosen to result in Cu 3 * ions in the composition and a current source for passing 
a superconducting current through the superconducting composition. 

Support is found in original claim 34 at page 36 of the specification and in original 
claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 
58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 (pages 49-5084), 
84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the title at page 1 of 
the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description 
at page 4, lines 10 to 21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, and page 18, line 
20. 



Dependent CLAIM 35 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 34, 
where the doping element includes an alkaline earth element. 

Support is found in original claim 35 at age 356 of the specification. 



Independent CLAIM 36 is directed to a combination comprising: 

a composition having a superconducting onset temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K, the composition being comprised of a substituted copper oxide 



CLAIM 34 



CLAIM 35 



CLAIM 36 



Volume 2 



Page 15 of 199 





exhibiting mixed valence states and at least one other element in its crystalline 
structure, 

a current source for passing a superconducting electrical current through the 
composition while the composition is at a temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K and less than the superconducting onset temperature, and 

a temperature controller for cooling the composition to a superconducting state at 
a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K. 

Support is found in original claim 36 at pages 36 to 37 of the specification and in 
original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 
(page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 
(pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the 
title at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and 
the description at page 4, lines 10 to 21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, and 
page 18, line 20. Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, 
line 1-9; and the paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 



Dependent CLAIM 37 is directed to the combination of claim 36, where the at 
least one other element is an alkaline earth element. 

Support is in original claim 37 at page 37 of the specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 38 recites the combination of claim 36, where the at least one 
other element is an element which results in Cu 3+ ions in the composition. 



CLAIM 37 



CLAIM 38 



Volume 2 



Page 16 of 199 



Support is in original claim 38 at page 37 of the specification. 

CLAIM 39 

Dependent CLAIM 39 is directed to the combination of claim 36, where the at 
least one other element is an element chosen to result in the presence of both 
Cu 2+ and Cu 3+ ions in the composition. 

Support is found original claim 39 at page 37 of the specification. 

CLAIM 40 

Independent CLAIM 40 is directed to an apparatus comprising a superconductor 
exhibiting a superconducting onset at an onset temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K, the superconductor being comprised of at least four elements, none of 
which is itself superconducting at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, a 
temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor at an operating 
temperature in excess of the onset temperature to maintain the superconductor 
in a superconducting state and a current source for passing current through the 
superconductor while in the superconducting state. 

Support is found in original claim 40 at page 38 of the specification and in original 
claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 
58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 
84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the title at page 1 of 
the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description 
at page 4, lines 10 to 21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, and page 18, line 
20. Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and 
the paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 



Volume 2 



Page 17 of 199 




• 



CLAIM 41 



Dependent CLAIM 41 is directed to the apparatus of claim 40, where the 
elements include a transition metal and oxygen. 

Support is found in original claim 41 at page 38 of the specification.. 



Independent CLAIM 42 A apparatus having a superconducting onset 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, the superconductor being a doped 
transition metal oxide, where the transition metal is itself non-superconducting 
and a current source for passing a superconducting electric current through the 
composition. 

Support is found in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification and in original 
claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 
58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 
84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the title at page 1 of 
the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description 
at page 4, lines 10 to 21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, and page 18, line 
20. 



Dependent CLAIM 43 is directed to the apparatus of claim 42, where the doped 
transition metal oxide is multivalent in the superconductor. 

Support is found in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. 



CLAIM 42 



CLAIM 43 



Volume 2 



Page 18 of 199 



CLAIM 44 



Dependent CLAIM 44 is directed to the apparatus of claim 42, further including 
an element which creates a mixed valent state of the transition metal. 

Support is in original claim 44 at page 38 of the specification. 

CLAIM 45 

Dependent CLAIM 45 is directed to the apparatus of claim 43, where the 
transition metal is Cu. 

Support is found in original claim 45 sat page 39 of the specification. 

CLAIM 46 

Independent CLAIM 46 is directed to an apparatus having a superconductor 
having a superconducting onset temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, the 
superconductor being an oxide having multivalent oxidation states and including 
a metal, the oxide having a crystalline structure which is oxygen deficient and a 
current source for passing a superconducting electric current through the 
superconductor. 

Support is found in original claim 46 at pages 39 of the specification and in 
original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 
(page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 
(pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the 
title at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and 
the description at page 4, lines 1 0 to 21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, and 
page 18, line 20 and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 19 of 199 




CLAIM 47 



Dependent CLAIM 47 is directed to the apparatus of claim 46, where the 
transition metal is Cu. 

Support is found in original claim 47 at page 39 of the specification. 



Independent CLAIM 48 is directed to a superconductive apparatus comprising a 
superconductive composition comprised of a transition metal oxide having 
substitutions therein, the amount of the substitutions being sufficient to produce 
sufficient electron-phonon interactions in the composition that the composition 
exhibits a superconducting onset at temperatures greater than or equal to 26°K, 
and a source of current for passing a superconducting electric current through 
the superconductor. 

Support is found in original claim 48 at page 39 of the specification and in original 
claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 
58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 
84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the title at page 1 of 
the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description 
at page 4, lines 10 to 21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, and page 18, line 
20 and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 49 is directed to the superconductive apparatus of claim 48, 
where the transition metal oxide is multivalent in the composition. 

Support is in original claim 49 at page 40 of the specification. 



CLAIM 48 



CLAIM 49 



Volume 2 



Page 20 of 199 



CLAIM 50 

Dependent CLAIM 50 is directed to the superconductive apparatus of claim 48, 
where the transition metal is Cu. 

Support is found in original claim 50 at page 40 of the specification. 

CLAIM 51 

Dependent CLAIM 51 is directed to the superconductive apparatus of claim 48, 
where the substitutions include an alkaline earth element. 

Support is found in original claim 51 at page 40 of the specification. 

CLAIM 52 

Dependent CLAIM 52 is directed to the superconductive apparatus of claim 48, 
where the substitutions include a rare earth or rare earth-like element. 

Support is found in original claim 52 at page 40 of the specification. 

CLAIM 53 

Independent CLAIM 53 A superconductive apparatus comprised of a copper 
oxide having a layer-like crystalline structure and at least one additional element 
substituted in the crystalline structure, the structure being oxygen deficient and 
exhibiting a superconducting onset temperature greater than or equal to 26°K. 

Support is found in original claim 53 at page 40 of the specification and in original 
claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 
58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 



Volume 2 



Page 21 of 199 



84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the title at page 1 of 
the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description 
at page 4, lines 1 0 to 21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, and page 1 8, line 
20 and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 54 

Dependent CLAIM 54 is directed to the superconductor of claim 53, where the 
additional element creates a mixed valent state of the copper oxide in the 
superconductor. 

Support is in original claim 54 at page 41 of the specification. 

CLAIM 55 

Independent CLAIM 55 is directed to a combination, comprising: 

a transition metal oxide having an superconducting onset temperature greater 
than about 26°K and having an oxygen deficiency, the transition metal being non- 
superconducting at the superconducting onset temperature and the oxide having 
multivalent states, 



Volume 2 



Page 22 of 199 




• 



a current source for passing an electrical superconducting current through the 
oxide while the oxide is at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, and 

a temperature controller for cooling the oxide in a superconducting state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K. 

Support is found in original claim 55 at page 41 of the specification and in original 
claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 
58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 
84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the title at page 1 of 
the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description 
at page 4, lines 10 to 21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, and page 18, line 
20 and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is in the 
specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the paragraph bridging 
pages 2 and 3. 



Dependent CLAIM 56 is directed to the combination of claim 55, where the 
transition metal is Cu. 

Support I in original claim 56 at page 41 of the specification. 



Independent CLAIM 57 is directed to a combination including; 

a superconducting oxide having a superconducting onset temperature greater 
than or equal to 26°K and containing at least 3 elements which are non- 
superconducting at the onset temperature, 



CLAIM 56 



CLAIM 57 



Volume 2 



Page 23 of 199 



a current source for passing a superconducting current through the oxide while 
the oxide is maintained at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, and 

a temperature controller for maintaining the oxide in a superconducting state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and less than the superconductive 
onset temperature. 

Support is found in original claim 57 at page 42 of the specification and in original 
claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 
58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 
84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the title at page 1 of 
the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description 
at page 4, lines 10 to 21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, and page 18, line 
20 and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is in the 
specification at page 4, lines 10-21; page 23, line 1-9; and the paragraph bridging 
pages 2 and 3. 

CLAIM 58 

Independent CLAIM 58 is directed to a combination, comprised of: 

a copper oxide superconductor having a superconductor onset temperature 
greater than about 26°K including an element which results in a mixed valent 
state in the oxide, the oxide being crystalline and having a layer-like structure, 

a current source for passing a superconducting current through the copper oxide 
while it is maintained at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and less 
than the superconducting onset temperature, and 



Volume 2 



Page 24 of 199 



• 




a temperature controller for cooling the copper oxide to a superconductive state 
at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and less than the superconducting 
onset temperature. 

Support is found in original claim 58 at pages 42 and 43 of the specification and 
in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 
(page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 
(pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the 
title at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and 
the description at page 4, lines 1 0 to 21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, and 
page 18, line 20 and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support 
is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the paragraph 
bridging pages 2 and 3. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states 1( [t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Independent CLAIM 59 is directed to a combination, comprised of: 

a ceramic-like material having an onset of superconductivity at an onset 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, 



CLAIM 59 



Volume 2 



Page 25 of 199 




a current source for passing a superconducting electrical current through the 
ceramic-like material while the material is maintained at a temperature greater 
than or equal to 26°K and less than the onset temperature, and 

a temperature controller for cooling the superconducting ceramic-like material to 
a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and less 
than the onset temperature, the material being superconductive at temperatures 
below the onset temperature and a ceramic at temperatures above the onset 
temperature. 

Support is found in original claim 59 at page 43 of the specification and in 
original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 
(page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 
(pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the 
title at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and 
the description at page 4, lines 10 to 21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, and 
page 18, line 20 and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support 
is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21; page 23, line 1-9; and the paragraph 
bridging pages 2 and 3. 

CLAIM 60 

Independent CLAIM 60 is directed to an apparatus comprised of a transition 
metal oxide, and at least one additional element, the superconductor having a 
distorted crystalline structure characterized by an oxygen deficiency and 
exhibiting a superconducting onset temperature greater than or equal to of 26°K, 
a source of current for passing a superconducting electric current in the transition 
metal oxide, and a cooling apparatus for maintaining the transition metal oxide 
below the onset temperature at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K. 



Volume 2 



Page 26 of 199 



# • 

Support is found in original claim 60 at pages 43 and 44 of the specification and 
in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 
(page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 
(pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the 
title at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and 
the description at page 4, lines 10 to 21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, and 
page 18, line 20 and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. 

CLAIM 61 

Dependent CLAIM 61 is directed to the apparatus of claim 60, where the 
transition metal is Cu. 

Support is in original claim 61 at page 44 of the specification. 

CLAIM 62 

Independent CLAIM 62 is directed to an apparatus comprised of a transition 
metal oxide and at least one additional element, the superconductor having a 
distorted crystalline structure characterized by an oxygen excess and exhibiting a 
superconducting onset temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, a source of 
current for passing a superconducting electric current in the transition metal 
oxide, and a cooling apparatus for maintaining the transition metal oxide below 
the onset temperature and at a temperature greater than or equal to of 26°K. 

Support is found in original claim 62 at page 44 of the specification and in original 
claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 
58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 
84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the title at page 1 of 
the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description 



Volume 2 



Page 27 of 199 



at page 4, lines 10 to 21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, and page 18, line 
20 and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. 

CLAIM 63 

Dependent CLAIM 63 is directed to the apparatus of claim 62, where the 
transition metal is Cu. 

Support is in original claim 63 at page 44 of the specification. 

CLAIM 64 

Independent CLAIM 64 is directed to a combination, comprising: 

a mixed copper oxide composition having enhanced polaron formation, said 
composition including an element causing the copper to have a mixed valent 
state in the composition, said composition further having a distorted octahedral 
oxygen environment leading to a T c greater than or equal to 26°K, 

a current source for providing a superconducting current through the composition 
at temperatures greater than or equal to 26°K and less than the T c , and 

a temperature controller for cooling the composition to a temperature greater 
than or equal to 26°K and less than the T c . 

Support is found in original claim 64 at pages 44 to 45 of the specification and in 
original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 
(page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 
(pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the 
title at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and 
the description at page 4, lines 10 to 21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, and 



Volume 2 



Page 28 of 199 




page 18, line 20 and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support 
is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the paragraph 
bridging pages 2 and 3. 

Support is at original claim 36 at page 36.of the specification. Support is found at 
page 26, lines 1-15.of the specification. Support is found in original claim 44 on 
page 38 of the specification and original claim 39 at page 37 of the specification. 

CLAIM 65 

CLAIM 65 is allowed. 

CLAIM 66 

Independent CLAIM 66 is directed to an apparatus comprising a 
superconductive composition having a transition temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, the composition including a multivalent transition metal oxide and 
at least one additional element, the composition having a distorted orthorhombic 
crystalline structure, a source of current for passing a superconducting electric 
current in the transition metal oxide, and a cooling apparatus for maintaining the 
transition metal oxide below the onset temperature and at a temperature greater 
than or equal to 26°K. 

Support is found in original claim 66 at pages 45 to 46 of the specification and in 
original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 
(page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 
(pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the 
title at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and 
the description at page 4, lines 10 to 21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, and 
page 18, line 20 and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 29 of 1 99 



CLAIM 67 



Dependent CLAIM 67 is directed to the apparatus of claim 66, where the 
transition metal oxide is a mixed copper oxide. 

Support is found in original claim 67 at page 46 of the specification. 

CLAIM 68 

Dependent CLAIM 68 is directed to the apparatus of claim 67, where the one 
additional element is an alkaline earth element. 

Support is found in original claim 68 at page 46 of the specification. 

CLAIM 69 

Independent CLAIM 69 is directed to a superconductive combination, 
comprising: 

a superconducting composition exhibiting a superconducting transition 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, the composition being a transition 
metal oxide having a distorted orthorhombic crystalline structure, and 

a current source for passing a superconducting electrical current through the 
composition while the composition is at a temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K and less than the superconducting transition temperature. 

Support is found in original claim 69 at page 46 of the specification and in 
original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 
(page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 
(pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the 



Volume 2 



Page 30 of 199 



title at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and 
the description at page 4, lines 1 0 to 21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, and 
page 18, line 20 and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. 

CLAIM 70 

Dependent CLAIM 70 is directed to the combination of claim 69, where the 
transition metal oxide is a mixed copper oxide. 

Support is found in original claim 70 at page 47 of the specification. 

CLAIM 71 

Dependent CLAIM 71 is directed to the combination of claim 70, where the mixed 
copper oxide includes an alkaline earth element. 

Support is found in original claim 71 at page 47 of the specification. 

CLAIM 72 

Dependent CLAIM 72 is directed to the combination of claim 71 , where the 
mixed copper oxide further includes a rare earth or rare earth-like element. 

Support is found in original claim 72 at page 47 of the specification. 

CLAIM 73 to 76 are withdrawn. 

CLAIM 77 -81 are allowed. 

CLAIMS 82 and 83 are withdrawn. 



Volume 2 



Page 31 of 199 





CLAIM 84 



Independent CLAIM 84 is directed to a superconducting combination, 
comprising: 

a mixed transition metal oxide composition containing a non-stoichiometric 
amount of oxygen therein, a transition metal and at least one additional element, 
the composition having substantially zero resistance to the flow of electricity 
therethrough when cooled to a superconducting state at a temperature greater 
than or equal to 26°K, the mixed transition metal oxide has a superconducting 
onset temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, and 

a current source for passing an electrical superconducting current through the 
composition when the composition is in the superconducting state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, and less than the superconducting 
onset temperature. 

Support is found in original claim 84 at page 52 of the specification and in 
original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 
(page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 
(pages 49-5084 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the title 
at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the 
description at page 4, lines 10 to 21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, and 
page 18, line 20 and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 85 is directed to the combination of claim 84, where the 
transition metal is copper. 

Support is in original claim 84 at page 82 of the specification. 



CLAIM 85 



Volume 2 



Page 32 of 199 





CLAIMS 86 and 87 are allowed. 



CLAIM 88 



Independent CLAIM 88 is directed to an apparatus comprising: 

a composition exhibiting a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, 

a cooler for cooling the composition to a temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K at which temperature the composition exhibits the superconductive state, 
and 

a current source for passing an electrical current through the composition while 
the composition is in the superconductive state. 

Support is found in original claim 88 at pages 53 to 54) of the specification and 
in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 
(page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 
(pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification) and 88 
(page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 
18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 21 , at page 20, line 1 
to page 21, line 2, and page 18, line 20 and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the 
specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 89 is directed to the apparatus of claim 88, where the 
composition is comprised of a metal oxide. 

Support is found I original claim 89 at page 54 of the specification. 



CLAIM 89 



Volume 2 



Page 33 of 199 





CLAIM 90 



Dependent CLAIM 90 is directed to the apparatus of claim 88, where the 
composition is comprised of a transition metal oxide. 

Support I in original claim 90 at page 54 of the specification. 



Independent CLAIM 91 is directed to a combination, comprising: 

a composition exhibiting the onset of a DC substantially zero resistance state at 
an onset temperature in excess of 30°K, and 

a current source for passing an electrical current through the composition while it 
is in the substantially zero resistance state. 

Support is found at page 10, lines 1-3, page 20, lines 1-5 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, and page 1 8, line 20 and in original 
claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 92 is directed to the combination of claim 91 , where the 
composition is a copper oxide. 



CLAIM 91 



CLAIM 92 



Volume 2 



Page 34 of 199 



Support is found in original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

CLAIM 93 

Independent CLAIM 93 is directed to an apparatus, comprising: 

a mixed copper oxide material exhibiting an onset of superconductivity at an 
onset temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, and 

a current source for producing an electrical current through the copper oxide 
material while it is in a superconducting state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, and page 18, line 20 and in original 
claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in original claim 10 at 
page 31 of the specification. 

CLAIM 94 

Dependent CLAIM 94 is directed to the apparatus of claim 93, where the copper 
oxide material exhibits a layer-like crystalline structure. 

Support is found in original claim 53 at page 40 of the specification. 
Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 



Volume 2 



Page 35 of 199 




individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

CLAIM 95 

Dependent CLAIM 95 is directed to the apparatus of claim 93, where the copper 
oxide material exhibits a mixed valence state. 

Support is found in original claim 36 at page 36 of the specification. 

CLAIM 96 

Independent CLAIM 96 is directed to a superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition comprising a copper-oxide compound having a 
layer-type perovskite-like crystal structure, the composition having a 
superconductor transition temperature T c of greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source for causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 



Volume 2 



Page 36 of 199 



Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, and page 18, line 20 and in original 
claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in original claim 10 at 
page 31 of the specification. Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10- 
21; page 23, line 1-9; and the paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIMS 97 to 99 are allowed. 

CLAIM 100 

CLAIM 100 The superconductive apparatus according to claim 96 in which the 
copper-oxide compound of the superconductive composition includes mixed 
valent copper ions. 

Support is at original claim 36 at page 36.of the specification. Support is found at 
page 26, lines 1-1 5. of the specification. Support is found in original claim 44 on 
page 38 of the specification and original claim 39 at page 37 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 37 of 199 



CLAIM 101 



Dependent CLAIM 101 is directed to the superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 100 in which the copper-oxide compound includes at least one element in a 
nonstoichiometric atomic proportion. 

Support is found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

CLAIM 102 

Dependant CLAIM 102 is directed to the superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 101 in which oxygen is present in the copper-oxide compound in a 
nonstoichiometric atomic proportion. 

Support is found in original claims 81 and 82 at page 51 and claim 84 and 86 at 
pages 52 to 53 of the specification. 

CLAIMS 103 to 108 are allowed. 

CLAIM 109 

Independent CLAIM 109 is directed to a superconductive apparatus comprising 
a composition having a transition temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, the 
composition including a rare earth or alkaline earth element, a transition metal 
element capable of exhibiting multivalent states and oxygen, including at least 
one phase that exhibits superconductivity at temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K, a temperature controller for maintaining the composition at the temperature 
to exhibit the superconductivity and current source for passing an electrical 



Volume 2 



Page 38 of 199 



superconducting current through the composition while exhibiting the 
superconductivity. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. Support is in the specification at 
page 4, lines 10-21; page 23, line 1-9; and the paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 

CLAIM 110 

Dependent CLAIM 1 10 is directed to the combination of claim 15, where the 
additional element is rare earth or alkaline earth element. 

Support is found at page 12 lines 6-8 of the specification and in the paragraph 
bridging pages 6 and 7. 

CLAIM 111 

Independent CLAIM 1 1 1 is directed to a device comprising a superconducting 
transition metal oxide having a superconductive onset temperature greater than 
or equal to 26°K, the superconducting transition metal oxide being at a 
temperature less than the superconducting onset temperature and having a 
superconducting current flowing therein. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 



Volume 2 



Page 39 of 199 





(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 



Independent CLAIM 1 12 is directed to a device comprising a superconducting 
copper oxide having a superconductive onset temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K, the superconducting copper oxide being at a temperature less than the 
superconducting onset temperature and having a superconducting current 
flowing therein. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 1 2 lines 6-8 and page 1 8, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 



CLAIM 112 



CLAIMS 113 and 114 are allowed. 



Volume 2 



Page 40 of 199 



# 



CLAIM 115 

Independent CLAIM 1 15 is directed to a device comprising a transition metal 
oxide having a T c greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a superconducting 
current the transition metal oxide is maintained at a temperature less than the T c . 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 

CLAIM 116 

Independent CLAIM 1 16 is directed to an apparatus comprising a transition metal 
oxide having a T c greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a superconducting 
current the transition metal oxide is maintained at a temperature less than the T c . 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 



Volume 2 Page 41 of 199 



# 



Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 

CLAIM 117 

Independent CLAIM 1 17 is directed to a structure comprising a transition metal 
oxide having a T c greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a superconducting 
current. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 

CLAIM 118 

Independent CLAIM 1 18 is directed to an apparatus comprising a transition 
metal oxide having a T c greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a superconducting 
current. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41 ), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 



Volume 2 



Page 42 of 199 



21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 

CLAIM 119 

Independent CLAIM 1 19 is directed to a device comprising a copper oxide having 
a T c greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a superconducting current the copper 
oxide is maintained at a temperature less than the T c . 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 

CLAIM 120 

Independent CLAIM 120 is directed to an apparatus comprising a copper oxide 
having a T c greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a superconducting current the 
copper oxide is maintained at a temperature less than the T c . 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 



Volume 2 



Page 43 of 199 



(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 

CLAIM 121 

Independent CLAIM 121 is directed to a device comprising a copper oxide having 
a T c greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a superconducting current. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 

CLAIM 122 

Independent CLAIM 122 is directed to an apparatus comprising a copper oxide 
having a T c greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a superconducting current. 



Volume 2 



Page 44 of 199 



Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 

CLAIMS 123 to 125 are allowed 

CLAIM 126 

Independent CLAIM 126 is directed to a device comprising a composition of 
matter having a T c greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a superconducting 
current, the composition comprising at least one each of a rare earth, and copper 
oxide. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 45 of 199 



# 



CLAIM 127 

Independent CLAIM 127 is directed to a device comprising a composition of 
matter having a T c greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a superconducting 
current, the composition comprising at least one each of a NIB element, and 
copper oxide. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 

CLAIM 128 

Independent CLAIM 128 is directed to a transition metal oxide device comprising 
a T c .greater than or equal to 26°K and carrying a superconducting current. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 46 of 199 



Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 

CLAIM 129 

Independent CLAIM 129 I directed to a copper oxide device comprising a T c 
greater than or equal to 26°K and carrying a superconducting current. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 

CLAIM 130 

Independent CLAIM 130 is directed to a superconductive apparatus comprising a 
composition having a transition temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, the 
composition including a rare earth or Group III B element, a transition metal 
element capable of exhibiting multivalent states and oxygen, including at least 
one phase that exhibits superconductivity at temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K, a temperature controller for maintaining the composition at the 
temperature to exhibit the superconductivity and a current source for passing an 
electrical superconducting current through the composition which exhibiting the 
superconductivity. 



Volume 2 



Page 47 of 199 



Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. Support is in the specification at 
page 4, lines 10-21; page 23, line 1-9; and the paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 

CLAIM 131 

Dependent CLAIM 131 is directed to combination of claim 15, where the 
additional element is a rare earth or Group III B element. 

Support is found in original claim 17 at page 32 of the specification. 

CLAIM 132 

Dependent CLAIM 132 is directed to the combination of claim 12, where the 
composition includes a substantially perovskite superconducting phase. 

Support is found in original claim 19 at page 32 of the specification. 
Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder d iff ractog rams ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 



Volume 2 



Page 48 of 199 



states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 133 

Dependent CLAIM 133 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 27, 
where the substituted Cu-oxide includes a rare earth or Group 1MB element. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 

CLAIM 134 

Dependent CLAIM 1 34 is directed to the combination of claim 71 , where the 
mixed copper oxide further includes a rare earth or Group III B element. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 

CLAIM 135 to 138 are allowed. 
CLAIM 139 

Independent CLAIM 139 is directed to a superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
having a substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the composition 



Volume 2 



Page 49 of 199 



# 



having a superconductor transition temperature T c of greater than or equal to 

26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source for causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. Support is in the specification at 
page 4, lines 10-21; page 23, line 1-9; and the paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Volume 2 



Page 50 of 199 




CLAIM 140 is allowed. 



CLAIM 141 



Independent CLAIM 141 is directed to an apparatus comprising a transition metal 
oxide having a phase therein which exhibits a superconducting state at a critical 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, 

a temperature controller maintaining the temperature of the material at a 
temperature less than the critical temperature to produce the superconducting 
state in the phase, and 

a current source passing an electrical supercurrent through the transition metal 
oxide while it is in the superconducting state. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 142 is directed to the apparatus of claim 141 , where the 
transition metal oxide is comprised of a transition metal capable of exhibiting 
multivalent states. 



CLAIM 142 



Volume 2 



Page 51 of 199 




Support can be found at page 5, lines 1-10 of the specification. 

CLAIM 143 

Dependent CLAIM 143 is directed to the apparatus of claim 141 , where the 
transition metal oxide is comprised of a Cu oxide. 

Support can be found at page 6, lines 1-10 of the specification. 

CLAIMS144 to 145 are allowed. 

CLAIM 146 

Independent CLAIM 146 is directed to an apparatus: 

a composition exhibiting a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, 

a temperature controller maintaining the composition at a temperature greater 
than or equal to 26°K at which temperature the composition exhibits the 
superconductive state, and 

a current source passing an electrical current through the composition while the 
composition is in the superconductive state. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 



Volume 2 



Page 52 of 199 




and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 



CLAIM 147 

Dependent CLAIM 147 is directed to the apparatus of claim 146, where the 
composition is comprised of a metal oxide. 

Support is found in original claim 89. 

CLAIM 148 

Dependent CLAIM 148 is directed to the apparatus of claim 146, where the 
composition is comprised of a transition metal oxide. 

Support is found in original claim 89. 

CLAIM 149 

Independent CLAIM 149 is directed to a superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
having a layer-type perovskite-like crystal structure, the composition having a 
superconductor transition temperature T c of greater than or equal to 26°K; 



Volume 2 



Page 53 of 1 99 




(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants 1 article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left CoL, 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIMS 150 to 152 are allowed. 



Volume 2 



Page 54 of 199 




CLAIM 153 



Dependent CLAIM 153 is directed to the superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 149 in which the copper-oxide compound of the superconductive 
composition includes mixed valent copper ions. 

Support is at original claim 36 at page 36 of the specification. Support is found at 
page 26, lines 1-1 5. of the specification. Support is found in original claim 44 on 
page 38 of the specification and original claim 39 at page 37 of the specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 154 is directed to the superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 153 in which the copper-oxide compound includes at least one element in a 
nonstoichiometric atomic proportion. 

Support is found in original claim 81 and 82 at page 51 and claims 84 and 86 at 
pages 52 to 53 of the specification. 



CLAIM 155 The superconductive apparatus according to claim 154 in which 
oxygen is present in the copper-oxide compound in a non atomic proportion. 

Support is found in original claims 81 and 82 at page 51 and claims 84 and 86 at 
pages 52 and 53 of the specification. 



CLAIM 154 



CLAIM 155 



CLAIM 156 to 161 are allowed. 



Volume 2 



Page 55 of 199 





CLAIM 162 



Independent CLAIM 162 is directed to an apparatus comprising copper oxide 
having a phase therein which exhibits a superconducting state at a critical 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller maintaining the temperature of the material at a 
temperature less than the critical temperature to produce the superconducting 
state in the phase; 

a current source passing an electrical supercurrent through the copper oxide 
while it is in the superconducting state; 

the copper oxide includes at group consisting of a Group II A element, a rare 
earth element and a Group III B element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 



CLAIM 163 



Independent CLAIM 163 is directed to an apparatus comprising: 



Volume 2 



Page 56 of 199 



a composition comprising copper, oxygen and any element selected from the 
group consisting of a Group II A element, a rare earth element and a Group III B 
element, where the composition is a mixed copper oxide having a non- 
stoichiometric amount of oxygen therein and exhibiting a superconducting state 
at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller maintaining the composition in the superconducting thee 
at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; and 

a current source passing an electrical current through the composition while the 
composition is in the superconducting state. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

CLAIM 164 

Independent CLAIM 164 is directed to an apparatus comprising: 

a composition exhibiting a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K; 



Volume 2 



Page 57 of 199 



a temperature controller maintaining the composition at a temperature greater 
than or equal to 26°K at which temperature the composition exhibits the 
superconductive state; 

a current source passing an electrical current through the composition while the 
composition is in the superconductive state; and 

the composition including a copper oxide and an element selected from the 
group consisting of Group II A element, a rare earth element and a Group III B 
element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

CLAIM 165 

Independent CLAIM 165 is directed to an apparatus for causing electric-current 
flow in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 



Volume 2 



Page 58 of 199 



having a layer-type perovskite-like crystal structure, the composition having a 
superconductive transition temperature T c of greater than or equal to 26°K, the 
superconductive composition includes at least one element selected from the 
group consisting of a Group II A element, a rare earth element; and a Group III B 
element; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 

line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 

found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 



Volume 2 



Page 59 of 199 



# 



states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 166 

CLAIM 166 An apparatus for conducting an electric current essentially without 
resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
having a layer-type perovskite-like crystal structure, the copper-oxide compound 
including at least one element selected from the group consisting of a Group II A 
element, a rare earth element and a Group III B element, the composition having 
a superconductive/resistive transition defining a superconductive/resistive- 
transition temperature range between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature T c and a lower limit defined by an effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity 
intercept temperature T p=0 , the transition-onset temperature T c being greater than 
or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 
of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 



Volume 2 



Page 60 of 199 



21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 

line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 

found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIMS 167 to 181 are is allowed. 

CLAIM 182 

Independent CLAIM 182 is directed to an apparatus comprising a composition 
having a transition temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, the composition 
including a rare earth or alkaline earth element, a transition metal element 
capable of exhibiting multivalent states and oxygen, including at least one phase 
that exhibits superconductivity at temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, a 
temperature controller maintaining the composition at the temperature to exhibit 
the superconductivity and a current source passing an electrical superconducting 
current through the composition with the phrase exhibiting the superconductivity. 
Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 



Volume 2 



Page 61 of 199 



specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 



CLAIM 183 

Independent CLAIM 183 is directed to an apparatus comprising a 
superconducting transition metal oxide having a superconductive onset 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, a temperature controller maintaining 
the superconducting transition metal oxide at a temperature less than the 
superconducting onset temperature and a current source flowing a 
superconducting current therein. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 62 of 199 





CLAIM 184 



Independent CLAIM 184 is directed to an apparatus comprising a 
superconducting copper oxide having a superconductive onset temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, a temperature controller maintaining the 
superconducting copper oxide at a temperature less than the superconducting 
onset temperature and a current source flowing a superconducting current in the 
superconducting oxide. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 



Independent CLAIM 187 is directed to an apparatus comprising a 
superconducting electrical current in a transition metal oxide having a T c greater 
than or equal to 26°K and maintaining the transition metal oxide at a temperature 
less than the T c . 



CLAIM 185 to 186 are allowed. 



CLAIM 187 



Volume 2 



Page 63 of 1 99 



Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

CLAIM 188 

Independent CLAIM 188 is directed to an apparatus comprising a current source 
flowing a superconducting current in a copper oxide having a T c greater than or 
equal to 26°K and a temperature controller maintaining the copper oxide at a 
temperature less than the T c . 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 64 of 199 



CLAIM 189 to 191 are allowed. 

Independent CLAIM 192 is directed to an apparatus comprising a current source 
flowing a superconducting electrical current in a composition of matter having a 
T c greater than or equal to 26°K, the composition comprising at least one each of 
a rare earth, and copper oxide and a temperature controller maintaining the 
composition of matter at a temperature less than the T c . 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

CLAIM 193 

Independent CLAIM 193 is directed to an apparatus comprising a current source 
flowing a superconducting electrical current in a composition of matter having a 
T c greater than or equal to 26°K carrying, the composition comprising at least 
one each of a Group III B element, and copper oxide and a temperature 
controller maintaining the composition of matter at a temperature less than the T c . 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 



Volume 2 



Page 65 of 199 



specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

CLAIM 194 

Independent CLAIM 194 is directed to an apparatus comprising a current source 
flowing a superconducting electrical current in a transition metal oxide comprising 
a T c greater than or equal to 26°K and a temperature controller maintaining the 
transition metal oxide at a temperature less than the T c . 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 66 of 1 99 



CLAIM 195 



Independent CLAIM 195 is directed to an apparatus comprising a current source 
flowing a superconducting electrical current in a copper oxide composition of 
matter comprising a T c greater than or equal to 26°K and a temperature controller 
maintaining the copper oxide composition of matter at a temperature less than 
the T c . 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

CLAIM 196 and 197 are allowed. 

CLAIM 198 

Independent CLAIM 198 is directed to a superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
having a substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the composition 



Volume 2 



Page 67 of 199 



having a superconductor transition temperature T c of greater than or equal to 
26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 

line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 

found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Volume 2 



Page 68 of 1 99 




CLAIM 199 



Dependent CLAIM 199 is directed to the superconductive apparatus according 
to claim 198 in which the copper-oxide compound of the superconductive 
composition includes at least one element selected from the group consisting of 
a rare-earth element, a Group III B element and an alkaline-earth element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 200 is directed to the superconductive apparatus according 
to claim 199 in which the rare-earth is lanthanum. 

Support is found in original claim 6 at page 30 of the specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 201 is directed to the superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 199 in which the alkaline-earth element is barium. 



CLAIM 200 



CLAIM 201 



Volume 2 



Page 69 of 199 



Support is found in original claim 6 at page 30 of the specification. 

CLAIM 202 

Dependent CLAIM 202 is directed to the superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 198 in which the copper-oxide compound of the superconductive 
composition includes mixed valent copper ions. 

Support is at original claim 36 at page 36.of the specification. Support is found at 
page 26, lines 1-15.of the specification. Support is found in original claim 44 on 
page 38 of the specification and original claim 39 at page 37 of the specification. 

CLAIM 203 

Dependent CLAIM 203 is directed to the superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 202 in which the copper-oxide compound includes at least one element in a 
nonstoichiometric atomic proportion. 

Support is found at page 1 1 , lines 1-19 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claims 81 and 82 at page 51 and claim 84 and 86 at pages 52 to 53 of 
the specification. 

CLAIM 204 

Dependent CLAIM 204 is directed to the superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 203 in which oxygen is present in the copper-oxide compound in a 
nonstoichiometric atomic proportion. 

Support is found at page 1 1 , lines 1-19 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claims 81 and 82 at page 51 and claim 84 and 86 at pages 52 to 53 of 
the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 70 of 199 



• 



CLAIM 205 

Independent CLAIM 205 is directed a superconductive apparatus for conducting 
an electric current essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
having a substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the copper-oxide 
compound including at least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
rare-earth element, a Group III B element and an alkaline-earth element, the 
composition having a superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range between an upper limit 
defined by a transition-onset temperature T c and a lower limit defined by an 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 , the transition-onset 
temperature T c being greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 
of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 71 of 199 



Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 

line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 

found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 206 

Dependent CLAIM 206 is directed to the superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 205 in which the at least one element is lanthanum. 

Support is found in original claim 6 at page 30 of the specification. 

CLAIM 207 

Dependent CLAIM 207 is directed to the superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 205 in which the alkaline-earth element is barium. 

Support is found in original claim 4 at page 30 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 72 of 199 



CLAIM 208 

Dependent CLAIM 208 is directed to the superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 205 in which the copper-oxide compound of the superconductive 
composition includes mixed valent copper ions. 

Support is at original claim 36 at page 36.of the specification. Support is found at 
page 26, lines 1-15.of the specification. Support is found in original claim 44 on 
page 38 of the specification and original claim 39 at page 37 of the specification. 

CLAIM 209 

Dependent CLAIM 209 is directed to the superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 208 in which the copper-oxide compound includes at least one element in a 
nonstoichiometric atomic proportion. 

Support is found at page 1 1 , lines 1-19 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claims 81 and 82 at page 51 and claim 84 and 86 at pages 52 to 53 of 
the specification. 

CLAIM 210 

Dependent CLAIM 210 is directed to the superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 209 in which oxygen is present in the copper-oxide compound in a 
nonstoichiometric atomic proportion. 

Support is found at page 1 1 , lines 1-19 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claims 81 and 82 at page 51 and claim 84 and 86 at pages 52 to 53 of 
the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 73 of 199 



CLAIM 211 

Independent CLAIM 21 1 is directed to a superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
having a substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the composition 
having a superconductive transition temperature T c of greater than or equal to 
26°K, the superconductive composition includes at least one element selected 
from the group consisting of a Group II A element, a rare earth element; and a 
Group III B element; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 74 of 199 



• 



Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 

line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 

found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 212 

Independent CLAIM 212 is directed to a superconductive apparatus for 
conducting an electric current essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
having a substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the copper-oxide 
compound including at least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
Group II A element, a rare earth element and a Group III B element, the 
composition having a superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range between an upper limit 
defined by a transition-onset temperature T c and a lower limit defined by an 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 , the transition-onset 
temperature T c being greater than or equal to 26°K; 



Volume 2 



Page 75 of 199 



• 




(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 
of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 

line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 

found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



CLAIM 213 to 215 are allowed. 



Volume 2 



Page 76 of 199 



CLAIM 216 



Independent CLAIM 216 is directed to a superconductive apparatus for 
conducting an electric current essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a transition metal-oxide 
compound having a substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the 
transition metal-oxide compound including a Group II A element and at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of a rare earth element and a Group 
III B element, the composition having a superconductive/resistive transition 
defining a superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range between an 
upper limit defined by a transition-onset temperature T c and a lower limit defined 
by an effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 , the transition- 
onset temperature T c being greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 
of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 77 of 199 



Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 

line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 

found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 217 

Dependent CLAIM 217 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 182 
wherein the composition comprises a substantially layered perovskite crystal 
structure. 

Support is found at page 26, line 8-25 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Volume 2 



Page 78 of 1 99 



CLAIM 218 



Dependent CLAIM 218 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 183 
wherein the superconducting transition metal oxide comprises a substantially 
layered perovskite crystal structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 and 1 3 at page 31 of the 
specification. 

Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 219 

Dependent CLAIM 219 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 184 
wherein the superconducting copper oxide comprises a substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 



Volume 2 



Page 79 of 199 



states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIMS 220 and 221 are allowed. 

CLAIM 222 

Dependent CLAIM 222 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 187 
wherein the transition metal oxide comprises a substantially layered perovskite 
crystal structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 223 

Dependent CLAIM 223 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 188 
wherein the copper oxide comprises a substantially layered perovskite crystal 
structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 80 of 199 





Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Dependent CLAIM 227 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 192 
wherein the composition of matter comprises a substantially layered perovskite 
crystal structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants* article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Dependent CLAIM 228 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 193 
wherein the composition of matter comprises substantially layered perovskite 
crystal structure. 



CALIMS 224 TO 226 are allowed. 



CLAIM 227 



CLAIM 228 



Volume 2 



Page 81 of 199 





Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder d iff ractog rams ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Dependent CLAIM 229 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 194 
wherein the transition metal oxide comprises substantially layered perovskite 
crystal structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Dependent CLAIM 230 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 195 
wherein the copper oxide composition comprises substantially layered perovskite 
crystal structure. 



CLAIM 229 



CLAIM 230 



Volume 2 



Page 82 of 1 99 




Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 231 is allowed. 

CLAIM 232 

Independent CLAIM 232 is directed to an apparatus comprising: 

a transition metal oxide comprising a phase therein which exhibits a 
superconducting state at a critical temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, 

a temperature controller for maintaining the temperature of the material at a 
temperature less than the critical temperature to produce the superconducting 
state in the phase, and 

a source of an electrical supercurrent through the transition metal oxide while it is 
in the superconducting state. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 



Volume 2 



Page 83 of 1 99 



21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

CLAIM 233 

Dependent CLAIM 233 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 232, where 
the transition metal oxide is comprised of a transition metal capable of exhibiting 
multivalent states. 

Support is found in original claiml at page 29 of the specification. 

CLAIM 234 

Dependent CLAIM 234 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 232, where 

the transition metal oxide is comprised of a Cu oxide. 

Support is found in original claim 22 at page 33 of the specification. 

CLAIMS 235 and 236 are allowed. 

CLAIM 237 

Independent CLAIM 237 is directed to an apparatus comprising: 

a composition exhibiting a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, a temperature controller for maintaining the composition at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K at which temperature the composition 
exhibits the superconductive state, and 



Volume 2 



Page 84 of 199 





a source of an electrical current through the composition while the composition is 
in the superconductive state. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 238 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 237, where 
the composition is comprised of a metal oxide. 

Support is in original claim 89 on page 54 of the specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 239 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 238, where 
the composition is comprised of a transition metal oxide. 
Support is in original claim 90 on page 54 of the specification. 



Independent CLAIM 240 An apparatus capable of carrying electric current flow 
in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, 
comprising: 



CLAIM 238 



CLAIM 239 



CLAIM 240 



Volume 2 



Page 85 of 199 



(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
comprising a layer-type perovskite-like crystal structure, the composition 
comprising a superconductor transition temperature T c of greater than or equal to 
26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the superconductor element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIMS 241 to 243 are allowed. 



Volume 2 



Page 86 of 199 



CLAIM 244 



Dependent CLAIM 244 is directed to An apparatus according to claim 240 in 
which the copper-oxide compound of the superconductive composition includes 
mixed valent copper ions. 

Support is at original claim 36 at page 36.of the specification. Support is found at 
page 26, lines 1-1 5. of the specification. Support is found in original claim 44 on 
page 38 of the specification and original claim 39 at page 37 of the specification. 



CLAIM 245 



Dependent CLAIM 245 is directed to An apparatus according to claim 244 in 
which the copper-oxide compound includes at least one element in a 
nonstoichiometric atomic proportion. 

Support is found at page 1 1 , lines 1-19 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claims 81 and 82 at page 51 and claim 84 and 86 at pages 52 to 53 of 
the specification. 

CLAIM 247 

Dependent CLAIM 246 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 245 in 
which oxygen is present in the copper-oxide compound in a nonstoichiometric 
atomic proportion. 

Support is found at page 1 1 , lines 1-19 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claims 81 and 82 at page 51 and claim 84 and 86 at pages 52 to 53 of 
the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 87 of 199 



CLAIMS 247 to 252 are allowed. 
CLAIM 253 

Independent CLAIM 253 is directed to an apparatus comprising: 

a copper oxide comprising a phase therein which exhibits a superconducting 
state at a critical temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller for maintaining the temperature of the material at a 
temperature less than the critical temperature to produce the superconducting 
state in the phase; 

a source of an electrical supercurrent through the copper oxide while it is in the 
superconducting state; 

the copper oxide includes at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a Group II A element, a rare earth element and a Group III B 
element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. Support is found at 



Volume 2 



Page 88 of 199 




page 11, lines 1-19 of the specification. Support is found in original claims 81 and 
82 at page 51 and claim 84 and 86 at pages 52 to 53 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

CLAIM 254 

Independent CLAIM 254 is directed to an apparatus comprising: 

a composition including copper, oxygen and an element selected from the group 
consisting of a Group II A element, a rare earth element and a Group 1MB 
element, where the composition is a mixed copper oxide comprising a non- 
stoichiometric amount of oxygen therein and exhibiting a superconducting state 
at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller for maintaining the composition in the superconducting 
state at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; and 

a source of an electrical current through the composition while the composition is 
in the superconducting state. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 89 of 1 99 




Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 

line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 

found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

CLAIM 255 

Independent CLAIM 255 is directed to an apparatus comprising: 

a composition exhibiting a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller for maintaining the composition at a temperature greater 
than or equal to 26°K at which temperature the composition exhibits the 
superconductive state; 

a source of an electrical current through the composition while the composition is 
in the superconductive state; and 

the composition including a copper oxide and an element selected from the 
group consisting of Group II A element, a rare earth element and a Group III B 
element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 



Volume 2 



Page 90 of 199 



and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 

line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 

found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

CLAIM 256 

Independent CLAIM 256 is directed to an apparatus capable of carrying an 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
comprising a layer-type perovskite-like crystal structure, the composition 
comprising a superconductive transition temperature T c of greater than or equal 
to 26°K, the superconductive composition includes at least one element selected 
from the group consisting of a Group II A element, a rare earth element; and a 
Group III B element; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the superconductor element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 



Volume 2 



Page 91 of 199 




specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. Support is found at 
page 11, lines 1-19 of the specification. Support is found in original claims 81 and 
82 at page 51 and claim 84 and 86 at pages 52 to 53 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Independent CLAIM 257 is directed to an apparatus capable of carrying an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 



CLAIM 257 



Volume 2 



Page 92 of 199 



comprising a layer-type perovskite-like crystal structure, the copper-oxide 
compound including at least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
Group II A element, a rare earth element and a Group III B element, the 
composition comprising a superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range between an upper limit 
defined by a transition-onset temperature T c and a lower limit defined by an 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 , the transition-onset 
temperature T c being greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 
of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the superconductor element. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. Support is found at 
page 1 1 , lines 1 -1 9 of the specification. Support is found in original claims 81 and 
82 at page 51 and claim 84 and 86 at pages 52 to 53 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 93 of 199 



Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIMS 258 TO 267 are allowed. 

CLAIM 268 

Independent CLAIM 268 is directed to an apparatus comprising: 

a copper oxide comprising a phase therein which exhibits a superconducting 
state at a critical temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller for maintaining the temperature of the material at a 
temperature less than the critical temperature to produce the superconducting 
state in the phase; 

a source for an electrical supercurrent through the copper oxide while it is in the 
superconducting state; 

the copper oxide includes at least one element selected from group consisting of 
a Group II A element, at least one element selected from the group consisting of 
a rare earth element and at least one element selected from the group consisting 
of a Group III B element. 



Volume 2 



Page 94 of 199 



Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. Support is found at 
page 11, lines 1-19 of the specification. Support is found in original claims 81 and 
82 at page 51 and claim 84 and 86 at pages 52 to 53 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

CLAIMS 269 TO 272 are allowed. 

CLAIM 273 

Independent CLAIM 273 is directed to an apparatus comprising a composition 
comprising a transition temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, the 
composition including a rare earth or alkaline earth element, a transition metal 
element capable of exhibiting multivalent states and oxygen, including at least 
one phase that exhibits superconductivity at temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K, a temperature controller for maintaining the composition at the temperature 
to exhibit the superconductivity and a source of an electrical superconducting 
current through the composition with the phrase exhibiting the superconductivity. 



Volume 2 



Page 95 of 199 



Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. Support is found at 
page 11, lines 1-19 of the specification. Support is found in original claims 81 and 
82 at page 51 and claim 84 and 86 at pages 52 to 53 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

CLAIM 274 

Independent CLAIM 274 is directed to an apparatus comprising providing a 
superconducting transition metal oxide comprising a superconductive onset 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, a temperature controller for 
maintaining the superconducting transition metal oxide at a temperature less 
than the superconducting onset temperature and a source of a superconducting 
current therein. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41 ), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 



Volume 2 



Page 96 of 1 99 





21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 



Independent CLAIM 275 is directed to an apparatus comprising a 
superconducting copper oxide comprising a superconductive onset temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconducting copper oxide at a temperature less than the superconducting 
onset temperature and a source of a superconducting current in the 
superconducting oxide. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 



CLAIM 275 



CLAIMS 276 to 277 are allowed. 



Volume 2 



Page 97 of 199 



CLAIM 278 

Independent CLAIM 278 is directed to an apparatus comprising a source of a 
superconducting electrical current in a transition metal oxide comprising a T c 
greater than or equal to 26°K and a temperature controller for maintaining the 
transition metal oxide at a temperature less than the T c . 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

CLAIM 279 

Independent CLAIM 279 is directed to an apparatus comprising a source of a 
superconducting current in a copper oxide comprising a T c greater than or equal 
to 26°K and a temperature controller for maintaining the copper oxide at a 
temperature less than the T c . 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 



Volume 2 



Page 98 of 1 99 



21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

CLAIMS 280 to 282 are allowed. 

CLAIM 283 

Independent CLAIM 283 is directed to an apparatus comprising a source of a 
superconducting electrical current in a composition of matter comprising a T c 
greater than or equal to 26°K, the composition comprising at least one each of a 
rare earth, and copper oxide and a temperature controller for maintaining the 
composition of matter at a temperature less than the T c . 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. Support is found at 
page 11, lines 1-19 of the specification. Support is found in original claims 81 and 
82 at page 51 and claim 84 and 86 at pages 52 to 53 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 99 of 199 



CLAIM 284 



Independent CLAIM 284 is directed to an apparatus comprising a source of a 
superconducting electrical current in a composition of matter comprising a T c 
greater than or equal to 26°K carrying, the composition comprising at least one 
each of a III B element, and copper oxide and a temperature controller for 
maintaining the composition of matter at a temperature less than the T c . 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. Support is found at 
page 1 1 , lines 1 -1 9 of the specification. Support is found in original claims 81 and 
82 at page 51 and claim 84 and 86 at pages 52 to 53 of the specification. 

CLAIM 285 

Independent CLAIM 285 is directed to an apparatus comprising a source of a 
superconducting electrical current in a transition metal oxide comprising a T c 
greater than or equal to 26°K and a temperature controller for maintaining the 
transition metal oxide at a temperature less than the T c . 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 



Volume 2 



Page 100 of 199 





(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification 



Independent CLAIM 286 is directed to an apparatus comprising a source of a 
superconducting electrical current in a copper oxide composition of matter 
comprising a T c greater than or equal to 26°K and a temperature controller for 
maintaining the copper oxide composition of matter at a temperature less than 
the T c . 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. 



CLAIM 286 



CLAIMS 287 to 288 are allowed. 



Volume 2 



Page 101 of 199 



CLAIM 289 



Independent CLAIM 289 is directed to an apparatus for causing electric current 
flow in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
comprising a substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the composition 
comprising a superconductor transition temperature T c of greater than or equal to 
26°K; 

b) a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the superconductor element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 1 2 lines 6-8 and page 1 8, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 102 of 199 





Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Dependent CLAIM 290 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 289 in 
which the copper-oxide compound of the superconductive composition includes 
at least one element selected from the group consisting of a rare-earth element 
and a Group III B element and at least one alkaline-earth element. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. Support is found at 
page 1 1 , lines 1-19 of the specification. Support is found in original claims 81 and 
82 at page 51 and claim 84 and 86 at pages 52 to 53 of the specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 291 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 290 in 
which the rare-earth or element is lanthanum. 

Support is found in original claim 6 at page 30 of the specification. 



CLAIM 290 



CLAIM 291 



Volume 2 



Page 103 of 199 



# 



CLAIM 292 



Dependent CLAIM 292 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 290 in 
which the alkaline-earth element is barium. 

Support is found in original claim 4 at page 30 of the specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 293 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 289 in 
which the copper-oxide compound of the superconductive composition includes 
mixed valent copper ions. 

Support is at original claim 36 at page 36.of the specification. Support is found at 
page 26, lines 1-15.of the specification. Support is found in original claim 44 on 
page 38 of the specification and original claim 39 at page 37 of the specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 294 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 293 in 
which the copper-oxide compound includes at least one element in a 
nonstoichiometric atomic proportion. 

Support is found at page 1 1 , lines 1-19 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claims 81 and 82 at page 51 and claim 84 and 86 at pages 52 to 53 of 
the specification. 

CLAIM 295 An apparatus according to claim 294 in which oxygen is present in 
the copper-oxide compound in a nonstoichiometric atomic proportion. 



CLAIM 293 



CLAIM 294 



CLAIM 296 to 301 are allowed. 



Volume 2 



Page 104 of 199 



CLAIM 302 



Independent CLAIM 302 is directed to an apparatus for causing electric-current 
flow in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
comprising a substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the composition 
comprising a superconductive transition temperature T c of greater than or equal 
to 26°K ) the superconductive composition includes at least one element selected 
from the group consisting of a Group II A element, a rare earth element; and a 
Group III B element; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the superconductor element. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. Support is found at 
page 11, lines 1-19 of the specification. Support is found in original claims 81 and 
82 at page 51 and claim 84 and 86 at pages 52 to 53 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 



Volume 2 



Page 105 of 199 



lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 303 

Independent CLAIM 303 is directed to an apparatus for conducting an electric 
current essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
comprising a substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the copper-oxide 
compound including at least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
Group II A element, a rare earth element and a Group III B element, the 
composition comprising a superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range between an upper limit 
defined by a transition-onset temperature T c and a lower limit defined by an 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 , the transition-onset 
temperature T c being greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 
of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the superconductor element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 



Volume 2 



Page 106 of 199 



21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIMS 304 to 307 are allowed 

CLAIM 308 

Dependent CLAIM 308 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 273 
wherein the composition comprises a substantially layered perovskite crystal 
structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 



Volume 2 



Page 107 of 199 



states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 309 

Dependent CLAIM 309 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 274 
wherein the superconducting transition metal oxide comprises a substantially 
layered perovskite crystal structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 310 

Dependent CLAIM 310 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 275 
wherein the superconducting copper oxide comprises a substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 



Volume 2 



Page 108 of 199 




individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIMS 311 to 312 are allowed. 
CLAIMS 313 

Dependent CLAIM 313 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 278 
wherein the transition metal oxide comprises a substantially layered perovskite 
crystal structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 314 

Dependent CLAIM 314 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 279 
wherein the copper oxide comprises a substantially layered perovskite crystal 
structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 109 of 199 



Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIMS 315 to 317 are allowed. 

CLAIM 318 

Dependent CLAIM 318 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 283 
wherein the composition of matter comprises a substantially layered perovskite 
crystal structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 319 

Dependent CLAIM 319 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 284 
wherein the composition of matter comprises substantially layered perovskite 
crystal structure. 



Volume 2 



Page 1 1 0 of 1 99 





Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Dependent CLAIM 320 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 285 
wherein the transition metal oxide comprises substantially layered perovskite 
crystal structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Dependent CLAIM 321 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 286 
wherein the copper oxide composition comprises substantially layered perovskite 
crystal structure. 



CLAIM 320 



CLAIM 321 



Volume 2 



Page 111 of 199 




Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 
Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left CoL, 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 1 92 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Dependent CLAIM 322 is directed to a superconductive combination according to 
anyone of claims 84 or 85, wherein the mixed transition metal oxide can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Dependent CLAIM 323 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
86, 87, 144, 146, 147, 163, 164, 168, 169, 173, 174, 178, 182, 189, 196, 197, 
214, 224, 235, 236, 237, 239, 254, 255, 259, 260, 264, 265 or 273, wherein the 
composition can be made according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 



CLAIM 322 



CLAIM 323 



Volume 2 



Page 112 of 199 



CLAIM 324 

Dependent CLAIM 324 is directed to a combination according to anyone of 
claims 91 , 92 or 36 to 39, wherein the composition can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 325 

Dependent CLAIM 325 is directed to a superconductive apparatus according to 
anyone of claims 1 to 1 1 , 33 to 35, 66 to 68,1 09, 1 30, 361 -366 or 370, wherein 
the composition can be made according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 326 

Dependent CLAIM 326 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
93 to 95 or 138, wherein the mixed copper oxide can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Volume 2 



Page 113 of 199 




CLAIM 327 



Dependent CLAIM 327 is directed to combination according to anyone of claims 
64 or 135, wherein the mixed copper oxide can be made according to known 
principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-23 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Dependent CLAIM 328 is directed to a superconductive apparatus according to 
anyone of claims 48 to 52, 96 to 108, 198 to 204, 371, 383 or 384, wherein the 
superconductive composition can be made according to known principles of 
ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Dependent CLAIM 329 is directed to a superconductive combination according to 
anyone of claims 12 to 23, 1 10, 131 , 132 or 367-370, wherein the 
superconductive composition can be made according to known principles of 
ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 



CLAIM 328 



CLAIM 329 



23. 



CLAIM 330 is allowed. 



Volume 2 



Page 114 of 199 




CLAIM 331 



CLAIM 331 A device according to claim 111, wherein the superconductive 
transition metal oxide can be made according to known principles of ceramic 
science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Dependent CLAIM 332 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
183, 217, 218, 274 or 309, wherein the superconductive transition metal oxide 
can be made according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Dependent CLAIM 333 is directed to a device according to claim 112, wherein 
the superconductive copper oxide can be made according to known principles of 
ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 



CLAIM 332 



CLAIM 333 



Volume 2 



Page 115 of 199 



F 

CLAIM 334 

Dependent CLAIM 334 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
275, 276, 310 or 31 1 , wherein the superconductive copper oxide can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 335 is allowed. 
CLAIM 336 

Dependent CLAIM 336 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
186, 221 , 272, 312 or 413, wherein the superconductive oxide composition can 
be made according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 337 

Dependent CLAIM 337 is directed to a device according to anyone of claims 114 
or 1 17, wherein the transition metal oxide can be made according to known 
principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Volume 2 



Page 116 of 199 




CLAIM 338 

Dependent CLAIM 338 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
24 to 26, 60 to 63, 1 16, 141 to 143, 172, 187, 222, 232 to 234, 263, 278, 285, 
287, 288, 313 or 320, wherein the transition metal oxide can be made according 
to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 339 

Dependent CLAIM 339 is directed to a superconductive apparatus according to 
anyone of claims 27-32, 132 or 370, wherein the transition metal oxide can be 
made according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 340 

Dependent CLAIM 340 is directed to An invention according to claim 118, 
wherein the transition metal oxide can be made according to known principles of 
ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Volume 2 



Page 117 of 199 




CLAIM 341 

Dependent CLAIM 341 is directed to a transition metal oxide device according to 
claim 128, wherein the transition metal oxide can be made according to known 
principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 342 

Dependent CLAIM 342 is directed to a apparatus according to anyone of claims 
40 to 45, wherein the superconductor can be made according to known principles 
of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 343 

Dependent CLAIM 343 is directed to a device according to anyone of claims 
1 19 or 121 , wherein the copper oxide can be made according to known principles 
of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 344 

Dependent CLAIM 344 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 120, 
wherein the copper oxide can be made according to known principles of ceramic 
science. 



Volume 2 



Page 118 of 199 




Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 345 

Dependent CLAIM 345 is directed to an invention according to claim 122, 
wherein the copper oxide can be made according to known principles of ceramic 
science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 346 

Dependent CLAIM 346 is directed to a superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 123, wherein the copper oxide can be made according to known principles 
of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 347 

Dependent CLAIM 347 is directed to a copper oxide device according to claim 
129, wherein the copper oxide can be made according to known principles of 
ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Volume 2 



Page 119 of 199 




CLAIM 348 



Dependent CLAIM 348 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
162, 167, 177, 188, 223, 253, 258, 268, 269, 270, 279 or 314, wherein the 
copper oxide can be made according to known principles of ceramic science. 



Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Dependent CLAIM 349 is directed to a combination according to claim 57, 
wherein the superconductive oxide can be made according to known principles of 
ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 



Dependent CLAIM 350 is directed to a combination according to anyone of 
claims 58 or 373, wherein the copper oxide conductor can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Dependent CLAIM 351 is directed to a combination according to claim 59, 
wherein the ceramic-like material can be made according to known principles of 
ceramic science. 



CLAIM 349 



CLAIM 350 



CLAIM 351 



Volume 2 



Page 120 of 199 



# 



Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Dependent CLAIM 352 is directed to a superconductive combination according to 
anyone of claims 69 to 71 or 134, wherein the superconductive composition can 
be made according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Dependent CLAIM 353 is directed to a superconductive apparatus according to 
anyone of claims 139, 140, 149 to 155, 156 to 161, 170, 171, 175, 176, 180, 181, 
205 to 216, 387-393, or 396-401, wherein the superconductive composition can 
be made according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Dependent CLAIM 354 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
165, 166, 185, 220, 240 to 246, 247 to 252, 261 , 262, 289, 290 to 301 , 394, 395, 
402-406, 409 or 410, wherein the superconductive composition can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 



CLAIM 352 



CLAIM 353 



CLAIM 354 



Volume 2 



Page 121 of 199 




Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Dependent CLAIM 355 is directed to a combination according to anyone of 
claims 77 to 81 , 186, 379 or 380, wherein the mixed copper oxide composition 
can be made according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Dependent CLAIM 356 is directed to a device according to anyone of claims 124 
to 127, wherein the composition of matter can be made according to known 
principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 



Dependent CLAIM 357 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
1 90 to 1 94, 225 to 229, 231 , 256, 257, 266, 267, 271 , 272, 281 to 284, 31 7 to 
319, 407, or 41 1 to 413, wherein the composition of matter can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



CLAIM 355 



CLAIM 356 



CLAIM 357 



CLAIM 358 is allowed. 



Volume 2 



Page 122 of 199 




CLAIM 359 

Dependent CLAIM 359 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
195 or 230, wherein the copper oxide composition can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 360 

Dependent CLAIM 360 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
286 or 321 , wherein the copper oxide composition can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 361 

Independent CLAIM 361 is directed to a superconducting apparatus comprising a 
composition having a transition temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, the 
composition including a rare earth or an element comprising a rare earth 
characteristic, a transition metal element capable of exhibiting multivalent states 
and oxygen, including at least one phase that exhibits superconductivity at 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, a temperature controller for 
maintaining the composition at the temperature to exhibit the superconductivity 
and a current source for passing an electrical superconducting current through 
the composition while exhibiting the superconductivity. 

Support for claim this claim is the same as for claim 1 . 



Volume 2 



Page 123 of 199 





CLAIM 362 



Independent CLAIM 362 is directed to he superconducting apparatus of claim 
361, further including an alkaline earth element substituted for at least one atom 
of the rare earth or element comprising a rare earth characteristic in the 
composition. 

Support for claim this is the same as for claim 2. 



Independent CLAIM 363 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 
362, where the rare earth or element comprising a rare earth characteristic is 
selected from the group consisting of La, Nd, and Ce. 

Support for claim this is the same as for claim 6. 



CLAIM 364 The superconducting apparatus of claim 361 , where the phase is 
crystalline with a structure comprising a perovskite characteristic. 

Support for claim this is the same as for claim 7. 



Dependent CLAIM 365 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 362, 
where the phase is crystalline with a structure comprising a perovskite 
characteristic. 

Support for claim this is the same as for claim 8. 



CLAIM 362 



CLAIM 364 



CLAIM 365 



Volume 2 



Page 124 of 199 




CLAIM 366 

Dependent CLAIM 366 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 361 , 
where the phase exhibits a crystalline structure comprising a layered 
characteristic. 

Support for claim this is the same as for claim 9. 

CLAIM 367 

Dependent CLAIM 367 is directed to the combination of claim 15, where the 
additional element is a rare earth or an element comprising a rare earth 
characteristic. 

Support for claim this is the same as for claim 17. 

CLAIM 368 

Dependent CLAIM 368 is directed to the combination of claim 12, where the 
composition includes a superconducting phase comprising a perovskite 
characteristic. 

Support for claim this is the same as for claim 19. 

CLAIM 369 

Dependent CLAIM 369 is directed to the combination of claim 20, where the 
substituted transition metal oxide has a structure comprising a layered 
characteristic. 



Volume 2 



Page 125 of 199 




Support for claim this is the same as for claim 23. 

CLAIM 370 

Dependent CLAIM 370 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 31 , 
where the crystalline structure comprises a layered characteristic, enhancing the 
number of Jahn-Teller polarons in the composite. 

Support for claim this is the same as for claim 32. 

CLAIM 371 

Dependent CLAIM 371 is directed to the superconductive apparatus of claim 48, 
where the substitutions include a rare earth or an element comprising a rare 
earth characteristic. 

Support for claim this is the same as for claim 52. 

CLAIM 372 

Independent CLAIM 372 is directed to a superconductive apparatus comprised of 
a copper oxide comprising a crystalline structure comprising a layered 
characteristic and at least one additional element substituted in the crystalline 
structure, the structure being oxygen deficient and exhibiting a superconducting 
onset temperature greater than or equal to 26°K. 

Support for this claim is the same as for claim 53. 



Volume 2 



Page 126 of 199 



• 



CLAIM 373 

Independent CLAIM 373 is directed to a combination, comprised of: 

a copper oxide superconductor having a superconductor onset temperature 
greater than about 26°K including an element which results in a mixed valent 
state in the oxide, the oxide being crystalline and comprising a structure 
comprising a layered characteristic, 

a current source for passing a superconducting current through the copper oxide 
while it is maintained at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and less 
than the superconducting onset temperature, and 

a temperature controller for cooling the copper oxide to a superconductive state 
at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and less than the superconducting 
onset temperature. 

Support for claim this is the same as for claim 58. 

CLAIM 374 

Independent CLAIM 374 is directed to a combination, comprised of: 

a material comprising a ceramic characteristic comprising an onset of 
superconductivity at an onset temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, 

a current source for passing a superconducting electrical current through the 
material comprising a ceramic characteristic while the material is maintained at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and less than the onset temperature, 
and 



Volume 2 



Page 127 of 199 



# 



a temperature controller for cooling the superconducting material having a 
ceramic characteristic to a superconductive state at a temperature greater than 
or equal to 26°K and less than the onset temperature, the material being 
superconductive at temperatures below the onset temperature and a ceramic at 
temperatures above the onset temperature. 

Support for claim this is the same as for claim 59. 

CLAIM 375 is allowed. 

CLAIM 376 

CLAIM 376 The combination of claim 71 , where the mixed copper oxide further 
includes a rare earth or an element comprising a rare earth characteristic. 
Support for claim this is the same as for claim72. 

CLAIM 377 is allowed. 

CLAIM 378 

CLAIM 378 An apparatus comprising a superconductor having a 
superconducting onset temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, the 
superconductor being comprised of a rare earth or an element (RE) comprising a 
rare earth characteristic, an alkaline earth element (AE), copper (CU), and 
oxygen (O) and having the general formula RE-AE-CU-O, the superconductor 
being made by a method comprising the steps of combining the rare earth or 
element comprising a rare earth characteristic, the alkaline earth element and the 
copper in the presence of oxygen to produce a mixed copper oxide including the 
rare earth or rare earth-like element and the alkaline earth element therein, and 



Volume 2 



Page 128 of 199 



heating the mixed copper oxide to produce a superconductor having a crystalline 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and exhibiting a superconducting 
onset temperature greater than or equal to 26°K the critical transition 
temperature of the superconductor being dependent on the amount of the 
alkaline earth element therein. 

Support for claim this is the same as for claim 75. 

CLAIM 379 SHOULD BE ALLOWED FOR THE SAME REASON THAT CLAIM 

77 IS ALLOWED 

Independent CLAIM 379 is directed to a combination, comprising: 

a mixed copper oxide composition including an alkaline earth element (AE) and a 
rare earth or element (RE) comprising a rare earth characteristic, the composition 
comprising a crystalline structure comprising a layered characteristic and multi- 
valent oxidation states, the composition exhibiting a substantially zero resistance 
to the flow of electrical current therethrough when cooled to a superconducting 
state at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, the mixed copper oxide 
having a superconducting onset temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, and 

a current source for passing an electrical superconducting current through the 
composition when the composition exhibits substantially zero resistance at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and less than the onset temperature. 

Support is found in original claim 69 at page 46 of the specification and in 
original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 
(page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 
(pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the 
title at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and 



Volume 2 



Page 129 of 199 



the description at page 4, lines 10 to 21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, and 
page 18, line 20 and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 380 SHOULD BE ALLOWED FOR THE SAM ERASON THAT CLAIM 

80 IS ALLOWED 

Dependent CLAIM 380 is directed to the combination of claim 379, wherein the 
crystalline structure comprises a perovskite characteristic. 

Support is found in Applicants 1 article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 



Volume 2 



Page 130 of 199 



lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 381 is allowed. 

CLAIM 382 

Dependent CLAIM 382 is directed to the apparatus of claim 93, where the copper 
oxide material exhibits a crystalline structure comprising a layered characteristic. 

Support for claim this is the same as for claim 94. 

CLAIM 383 

Independent CLAIM 383 is directed to a superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K J comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition comprising a copper-oxide compound having a 
crystal structure comprising a perovskite characteristic and a layered 
characteristic, the composition having a superconductor transition temperature T c 
of greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source for causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 



Volume 2 



Page 131 of 199 



Support for claim this is the same as for claim 96. 



Volume 2 Page 132 of 199 





CLAIMS 384 to 388 are allowed. 



CLAIM 389 



Independent CLAIM 389 is directed to a superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
comprising a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the composition having a superconductor transition 
temperature T c of greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor element. 
Support for claim this is the same as for claim 149. 



Independent CLAIM 394 is directed to an apparatus for causing electric-current 
flow in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, 
comprising: 



CLAIMS 390 to 383 are allowed. 



CLAIM 394 



Volume 2 



Page 133 of 199 



(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
comprising a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the composition having a superconductive transition 
temperature T c of greater than or equal to 26°K, the superconductive composition 
includes at least one element selected from the group consisting of a Group II A 
element, a rare earth element; and a Group III B element; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 

Support for claim this is the same as for claim 165. 

CLAIM 395 

Independent CLAIM 395 is directed to an apparatus for conducting an electric 
current essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
comprising a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the copper-oxide compound including at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of a Group II A element, a rare earth 
element and a Group III B element, the composition having a 
superconductive/resistive transition defining a superconductive/resistive- 
transition temperature range between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature T c and a lower limit defined by an effectively-zero-bulk- resistivity 



Volume 2 



Page 134 of 199 



intercept temperature T p=0 , the transition-onset temperature T c being greater than 
or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- resistivity intercept temperature T p==0 
of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 

Support for claim this is the same as for claim 166. 

CLAIMS 396 to 401 are allowed. 
CLAIM 402 

Independent CLAIM 402 is directed to an apparatus capable of carrying electric 
current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
comprising a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the composition comprising a superconductor transition 
temperature T c of greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the superconductor element. 



Volume 2 



Page 135 of 199 



• 




Support for claim this is the same as for claim 240. 



CLAIMS 403 to 406 are allowed. 



CLAIM 407 



CLAIM 407 An apparatus capable of carrying an electric-current flow in a 
superconductive state at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
comprising a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the composition comprising a superconductive 
transition temperature T c of greater than or equal to 26°K, the superconductive 
composition includes at least one element selected from the group consisting of 
a Group II A element, a rare earth element; and a Group III B element; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the superconductor element. 
Support for claim this is the same as for claim 256. 



Independent CLAIM 408 is directed to an apparatus capable of carrying an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 



CLAIM 408 



Volume 2 



Page 136 of 199 




(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
comprising a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the copper-oxide compound including at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of a Group II A element, a rare earth 
element and a Group III B element, the composition comprising a 
superconductive/resistive transition defining a superconductive/resistive- 
transition temperature range between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature T c and a lower limit defined by an effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity 
intercept temperature T p=0 , the transition-onset temperature T c being greater than 
or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 
of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the superconductor element. 
Support for claim this is the same as for claim 257. 

CLAIMS 409 to 413 are allowed. 
CLAIM 414 

Dependent CLAIM 414 is directed to a superconducting apparatus according to 
anyone of claims 361-365 or 366, wherein the composition can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Volume 2 



Page 137 of 199 



CLAIM 415 

Dependent CLAIM 415 is directed to a superconducting combination according to 
anyone of claims 367, 368 or 369, wherein the composition can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 416 

Dependent CLAIM 416 is directed to a superconducting apparatus according to 
anyone of claims 370 or 371 , wherein the composition can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 417 

Dependent CLAIM 417 is directed to a superconducting apparatus according to 
claim 372, wherein the copper oxide can be made according to known principles 
of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 418 

Dependent CLAIM 418 is directed to a combination according to claim 373, 
wherein the copper oxide can be made according to known principles of ceramic 
science. 



Volume 2 



Page 138 of 199 



Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 419 

Dependent CLAIM 419 is directed to a combination according to claim 374, 
wherein the material can be made by known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 420 

Dependent CLAIM 420 is directed to a apparatus according to claim 375, 
wherein the composition can be made by known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 421 

Dependent CLAIM 421 is directed to a combination according to claim 376, 
wherein the mixed copper oxide can be made by known principles of ceramic 
science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Volume 2 



Page 139 of 199 



CLAIM 422 



Dependent CLAIM 422 is directed to a combination according to anyone of 
claims 379 or 380, wherein the mixed copper oxide can be made by known 
principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 



Dependent CLAIM 423 is directed to a apparatus according to claim 382, 
wherein the copper oxide material can be made by known principles of ceramic 
science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Dependent CLAIM 424 is directed to a superconductive apparatus according to 
anyone of claims 383, 384, 385, 386, 387 and 389, wherein the composition can 
be made by known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 



23. 



CLAIM 423 



CLAIM 424 



23. 



Volume 2 



Page 140 of 199 




0 



CLAIM 425 



Dependent CLAIM 425 is directed to a apparatus according to claim 388, 
wherein the composition can be made according to known principles of ceramic 
science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Dependent CLAIM 426 is directed to a superconductive apparatus according to 
anyone of claims 389 to 400 or 401 , wherein the superconductive composition 
can be made by known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Dependent CLAIM 427 is directed to a apparatus according to anyone of claims 
402 to 412 or 413, wherein the superconductive composition can be made by 
known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 



CLAIM 426 



CLAIM 427 



23. 



Volume 2 



Page 141 of 199 



+ 



CLAIM 428 

Independent CLAIM 428 is directed to an apparatus capable of carrying electric 
current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K, comprising: 

a superconductive element comprising a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition comprising O and at least one element selected 
from the group consisting of Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra, Sc, Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, 
Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, and Lu; and 

the composition comprising a superconductor transition temperature T c of greater 
than or equal to 26°K. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. The alkaline earth and 
rare earth elements include Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra, Sc, Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, 
Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, and Lu, 



Volume 2 



Page 142 of 199 



CLAIM 429 



Dependent CLAIM 429 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 428, 
further including: 

a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

a source of an electric current to flow in the superconductor element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

CLAIM 430 

Dependent CLAIM 430 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 428, 
wherein the composition comprises a substantially layered structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 



Volume 2 



Page 143 of 199 



individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 431 

Dependent CLAIM 431 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 429, 
wherein the composition comprises a substantially layered structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 432 

Dependent CLAIM 432 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
428 to 430 or 431 , wherein the composition comprises a substantially perovskite 
crystal structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 



Volume 2 



Page 144 of 199 



• # 

individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 433 

Dependent CLAIM 433 is directed to an apparatus according to any one of 
claims 428 to 430 or 431 , wherein the composition comprises a perovskite-like 
structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 434 

Dependent CLAIM 434 is directed to an apparatus according to any one of 
claims 428 to 430 or 431 , wherein the composition comprises a perovskite 
characteristic. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 

Volume 2 Page 145 of 199 



lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 435 

Dependent CLAIM 435 is directed to an apparatus according to any one of 
claims 428 to 430 or 431 , wherein the composition comprises a perovskite 
related structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 436 

Dependent CLAIM 436 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
428 to 431 or 432, wherein the composition can be made according to known 
principals of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Volume 2 



Page 146 of 199 





CLAIM 437 



Dependent CLAIM 437 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 88 wherein 
the composition is an oxide. 

Support can be found in the specification at page 1 1 , line 19-24; page 15, line 
10-15; and original claim 46 at page 39. 



Independent CLAIM 438 is directed to an apparatus comprising: a means for 
conducting a superconducting current at a temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K and a current source for providing an electric current to flow in the means 
for conducting a superconducting current. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50),84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification), the title at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 
and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 21 , at page 20 line 1 to 
page 21 , line 2 and page 18, line 20. Means for conducting a superconducting 
current at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K are described at page 3, 
line 1 to page 28, line 5 of the specification. Means for providing an electric 
current is a conventionally used source or current shown in Fig, 1 as the 
combination of elements 2 and 18. 



Dependent CLAIM 439 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 438, 
wherein the means for conducting a superconductive current comprises a T c 
greater than or equal to 26°K. 



CLAIM 438 



CLAIM 439 



Volume 2 



Page 147 of 199 




Support can be found in the sentence bridging pages 5 and 6 of the specification. 

CLAIM 440 

Dependent CLAIM 440 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 438, further 
including a temperature controller for maintaining the means for conducting a 
superconducting current at the temperature. 

Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21; page 23, line 1-9; and the 
paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 

CLAIM 443 

CLAIM 441 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 438, 439 or 440, 
wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current comprises oxygen. 

Support can be found in the specification at page 1 1 , line 19-24; page 15, line 
10-15; and original claim 46 at page 39. 

CLAIM 442 

Dependent CLAIM 442 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current 
comprises one or more of the groups consisting of Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra, Sc, Y, 
La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb and Lu. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. The alkaline earth and 
rare earth elements include Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra, Sc, Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, 
Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, and Lu. 



Volume 2 



Page 148 of 199 




CLAIM 443 

Dependent CLAIM 443 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 or 440, wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current 
comprises one or more of Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba and Ra and one or more of Sc, Y, 
La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb and Lu. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. The alkaline earth and 
rare earth elements include Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra, Sc, Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, 
Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, and Lu. 

CLAIM 444 

Dependent CLAIM 444 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current 
comprises a layered structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Volume 2 



Page 149 of 199 




CLAIM 445 

Dependent CLAIM 445 is directed to An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current 
comprises a substantially perovskite structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



CLAIM 446 

Dependent CLAIM 446 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current 
comprises a perovskite-like structure. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Volume 2 



Page 150 of 199 





CLAIM 447 



Dependent CLAIM 447 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current 
comprises a perovskite related structure. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Dependent CLAIM 448 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current 
comprises a structure having a perovskite characteristic. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Dependent CLAIM 449 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current 
comprises a transition metal. 



CLAIM 448 



CLAIM 449 



Volume 2 



Page 151 of 199 




Support can be found in original claims 40 and 41 at page 38, original claims 88 
and 90 at page 54 of the specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 450 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current 
comprises a copper oxide. 

Support can be found in original claims 24 and 26 on pages 23 - 24 of the 
specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 451 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current 
comprises oxygen in a nonstoichiometric amount. 

Support can be found at Page 1 1 , lines 9-16, page 26 line 13-15, original claim 
81 and 82 page 51 , original claim 84 at page 52, original claim 86 at page 52-53 
of the specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 452 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current 
comprises a multivalent transition metal. 

Support can be found in original claim 66 at pages 45-46 of the specification. 



CLAIM 450 



CLAIM 451 



CLAIM 452 



Volume 2 



Page 152 of 199 



CLAIM 453 

Dependent CLAIM 453 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 or 440, wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current 
can be made according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 454 

Dependent CLAIM 454 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 441 , 
wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 455 

Dependent CLAIM 455 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 442, 
wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Volume 2 



Page 153 of 199 





CLAIM 456 



Dependent CLAIM 456 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 443, 
wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Dependent CLAIM 457 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 444, 
wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Dependent CLAIM 458 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 445, 
wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



CLAIM 457 



CLAIM 458 



Volume 2 



Page 154 of 199 




CLAIM 459 

Dependent CLAIM 459 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 446, 
wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 460 

Dependent CLAIM 460 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 447, 
wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 461 

Dependent CLAIM 461 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 448, 
wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Volume 2 



Page 155 of 199 




CLAIM 462 

Dependent CLAIM 462 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 449, 
wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 463 

Dependent CLAIM 463 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 450, 
wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 464 

Dependent CLAIM 464 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 451 , 
wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Volume 2 



Page 156 of 199 



CLAIM 465 



Dependent CLAIM 465 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 452, 
wherein the means for conducting a superconducting current can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 466 

Independent CLAIM 466 is directed to an apparatus comprising: 

a superconductive current carrying element comprising a T c greater than or equal 
to26K 

the superconductive current carrying element comprises a property selected from 
one or more of the group consisting of a mixed valent oxide, a transition metal, a 
mixed valent transition metal, a perovskite structure, a perovskite-like structure, a 
perovskite related structure, a layered structure, a stoichiometric or 
nonstoichiometric oxygen contents and a dopant. 

Support is found in original claim 64 at pages 44 to 45 of the specification and in 
original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 
(page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 
(pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the 
title at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and 
the description at page 4, lines 10 to 21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, and 
page 18, line 20 and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support 
is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the paragraph 
bridging pages 2 and 3. 



Volume 2 



Page 157 of 199 



Support can be found at Page 1 1 , lines 9-16, page 26 line 13-15, original claim 
81 and 82 page 51 , original claim 84 at page 52, original claim 86 at page 52-53 
of the specification. 

Support can be found in original claims 40 and 41 at page 38, original claims 88 
and 90 at page 54 of the specification. 

Support is at original claim 36 at page 36.of the specification. Support is found at 
page 26, lines 1-15.of the specification. Support is found in original claim 44 on 
page 38 of the specification and original claim 39 at page 37 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 466 

Dependent CLAIM 467 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 466, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element is at a temperature greater 
than or equal to 26 K 

Support can be found in original claim 58 at pages 42 -43 and at Page 4, lines 10 
-21 of the specification 



Volume 2 



Page 158 of 199 



CLAIM 468 

Dependent CLAIM 468 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 466, 
further including a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductive 
current carrying element at a temperature less than the T c . 

Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the 
paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 

CLAIM 469 

Dependent CLAIM 469 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
466, 467 or 468, wherein the superconductive current carrying element 
comprises one or more of the group consisting of Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra, Sc, Y, 
La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb and Lu. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. The alkaline earth and 
rare earth elements include Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra, Sc, Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, 
Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, and Lu. 

CLAIM 470 

Dependent CLAIM 470 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
466, 467 or 468, wherein the superconductive current carrying element 
comprises one or more of Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba and Ra and one or more of Sc, Y, 
La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb and Lu. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 



Volume 2 



Page 159 of 199 




found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. The alkaline earth and 
rare earth elements include Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra, Sc, Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, 
Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, and Lu. 

CLAIM 471 

Dependent CLAIM 471 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 469, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element comprises a transition 
metal. 

Support can be found in original claims 40 and 41 at page 38, original claims 88 
and 90 at page 54 of the specification. 

CLAIM 472 

Dependent CLAIM 472 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 470, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element comprises a transition 
metal 

Support can be found in original claims 40 and 41 at page 38, original claims 88 
and 90 at page 54 of the specification. 

CLAIM 473 

Dependent CLAIM 473 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
466, 467, or 468, wherein the superconducting current carrying element can be 
made according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Volume 2 



Page 160 of 199 




CLAIM 473 

Dependent CLAIM 474 is directed t an apparatus according to of claim 471 , 
wherein the superconducting current carrying element can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 475 

Dependent CLAIM 475 is directed to an apparatus according to of claim 472, 
wherein the superconducting current carrying element can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 476 

Independent CLAIM 476 is directed to an apparatus comprising: 

a superconductive current carrying element comprising a T c greater than or equal 
to 26 K; 

the superconductive current carrying element comprises an oxide, a layered 
perovskite structure or a layered perovskite-like structure and comprises a 
stoichiometric or nonstoichiometric oxygen content. 

Support can be found at Page 1 1 , lines 9-1 6, page 26 line 13-15, original claim 
81 and 82 page 51 , original claim 84 at page 52, original claim 86 at page 52-53 
of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 161 of 199 



Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 477 

Dependent CLAIM 477 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 476, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element is at a temperature greater 
than or equal to 26 K. 

Support can be found in original claim 58 at pages 42 -43 and at Page 4, lines 10 
-21 of the specification 

CLAIM 478 

Dependent CLAIM 478 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 476, further 
including a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductive current 
carrying element at a temperature less than the T c . 

Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the 
paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 



Volume 2 



Page 162 of 199 




CLAIM 479 



Dependent CLAIM 479 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
476, 477 or 478, wherein the superconductive current carrying element 
comprises one or more of the group consisting of Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra, Sc, Y, 
La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb and Lu. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. The alkaline earth and 
rare earth elements include Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra, Sc, Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, 
Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, and Lu. 



CLAIM 480 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 476, 477 or 478, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element comprises one or more of 
Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba and Ra and one or more of Sc, Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, 
Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb and Lu. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. The alkaline earth and 
rare earth elements include Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra, Sc, Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, 
Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, and Lu. 



Dependent CLAIM 481 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 479, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element comprises a transition 
metal. 



CLAIM 480 



CLAIM 481 



Volume 2 



Page 163 of 199 



• 



Support can be found in original claims 40 and 41 at page 38, original claims 88 
and 90 at page 54 of the specification. 

CLAIM 482 

Dependent CLAIM 482 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 480, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element comprises a transition 
metal- 
Support can be found in original claims 40 and 41 at page 38, original claims 88 
and 90 at page 54 of the specification. 

CLAIM 483 

Dependent CLAIM 483 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 476, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element comprises copper oxide. 

Support can be found in original claims 24 and 26 on pages 23 - 24 of the 
specification. 

CLAIM 484 

Dependent CLAIM 484 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
476, 477 or 478, wherein the superconductive current carrying element can be 
made according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Volume 2 Page 164 of 199 



CLAIM 485 

Dependent CLAIM 485 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 479, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 486 

Dependent CLAIM 486 directed to an apparatus according to claim 480, wherein 
the superconductive current carrying element can be made according to known 
principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 487 

Dependent CLAIM 487 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 481 , 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Volume 2 



Page 165 of 199 



CLAIM 488 

Dependent CLAIM 488 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 482, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 489 

Dependent CLAIM 489 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 483, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 490 

Dependent CLAIM 490 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 484, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Volume 2 



Page 166 of 199 



# 




CLAIM 491 



Dependent CLAIM 491 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 485, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



CLAIM 492 The superconducting apparatus of claim 361 , where the phase is 
crystalline with a structure comprising a perovskite related structure. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder d iff ractog rams ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Dependent CLAIM 493 is directed to the superconducting apparatus of claim 362, 
where the phase is crystalline with a structure comprising a perovskite related 
structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 



CLAIM 492 



CLAIM 493 



Volume 2 



Page 167 of 199 



Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 494 

Dependent CLAIM 494 is directed to the combination of claim 12, where the 
composition includes a superconducting phase comprising a perovskite related 
structure. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 495 

Dependent CLAIM 495 is directed to the combination of claim 379, wherein the 
crystalline structure comprises a perovskite related structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 



Volume 2 



Page 168 of 199 



individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 496 

Independent CLAIM 496 is directed to a superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition comprising a copper-oxide compound having a 
crystal structure comprising a perovskite related structure and a layered 
characteristic, the composition having a superconductor transition temperature T c 
of greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source for causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50),84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification), the title at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 
and 1 6 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 1 0 to 21 , at page 20 line 1 to 
page 21, line 2 and page 18, line 20. Support is in the specification at page 4, 
lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 



Volume 2 



Page 169 of 199 



Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the 
paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 

CLAIM 497 

Independent CLAIM 497 is directed to a superconductive apparatus for 
conducting an electric current essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
comprising a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the copper-oxide compound including at least one 
rare-earth or element comprising a rare earth characteristic and at least one 
alkaline-earth element, the composition having a superconductive/resistive 
transition defining a superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset temperature T c and a lower 
limit defined by an effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T q=0 , the 
transition-onset temperature T c being greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T q=0 
of the superconductive composition; and 



Volume 2 



Page 170 of 199 



(c) a current source for causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 

line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 

found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the 
paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 



Volume 2 



Page 171 of 199 



CLAIM 498 



Independent CLAIM 498 is directed to a superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
comprising a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the composition having a superconductor transition 
temperature T c of greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 
Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the 
paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 



Volume 2 



Page 172 of 199 




Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 499 

Independent CLAIM 499 is directed to a superconductive apparatus for 
conducting an electric current essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
comprising a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the copper-oxide compound including at least one 
rare-earth or rare-earth-like element and at least one alkaline-earth element, the 
composition having a superconductive/resistive-transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range between an upper limit 
defined by a transition-onset temperature T c and a lower limit defined by an 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 , the transition-onset 
temperature T c being greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 
of the superconductive composition; and 



Volume 2 



Page 173 of 199 



(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 
Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21; page 23, line 1-9; and the 
paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Volume 2 



Page 174 of 199 




CLAIM 500 

Independent CLAIM 500 is directed to an apparatus for causing electric-current 
flow in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
comprising a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the composition having a superconductive transition 
temperature T c of greater than or equal to 26°K, the superconductive composition 
includes at least one element selected from the group consisting of a Group II A 
element, a rare earth element; and a Group III B element; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 175 of 199 



Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 
Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the 
paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 501 

Independent CLAIM 501 is directed to an apparatus for conducting an electric 
current essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
comprising a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the copper-oxide compound including at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of a Group II A element, a rare earth 
element and a Group III B element, the composition having a 
superconductive/resistive transition defining a superconductive/resistive- 
transition temperature range between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature T c and a lower limit defined by an effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity 



Volume 2 



Page 176 of 199 



intercept temperature T p=0 , the transition-onset temperature T c being greater than 
or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 
of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 
Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the 
paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 



Volume 2 



Page 177 of 199 




states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIMS 502 to 507 are allowed. 
CLAIM 508 

CLAIM 508 An apparatus capable of carrying electric current flow in a 
superconductive state at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the* 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
comprising a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the composition comprising a superconductor 
transition temperature T c of greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the superconductor element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 178 of 199 




Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 
Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the 
paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants 7 article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 509 

Independent CLAIM 509 is directed to an apparatus capable of carrying an 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
comprising a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the composition comprising a superconductive 
transition temperature T c of greater than or equal to 26°K, the superconductive 
composition includes at least one element selected from the group consisting of 
a Group II A element, a rare earth element; and a Group III B element; 



Volume 2 



Page 179 of 199 



(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition temperature T c of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the superconductor element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 
Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the 
paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Volume 2 



Page 180 of 199 



CLAIM 510 



Independent CLAIM 510 is directed to an apparatus capable of carrying an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
comprising a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the copper-oxide compound including at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of a Group II A element, a rare earth 
element and a Group III B element, the composition comprising a 
superconductive/resistive transition defining a superconductive/resistive- 
transition temperature range between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature T c and a lower limit defined by an effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity 
intercept temperature T p=0 , the transition-onset temperature T c being greater than 
or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 
of the superconductive composition; 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the superconductor element. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 181 of 199 



Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 
Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the 
paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIMS 511 to 515 are allowed. 

CLAIM 516 

CLAIM 516 An apparatus of claim 146 wherein the means for carrying a 
superconductive current is comprised of an oxide. 

Support can be found at Page 1 1 , lines 9-16, page 26 line 13-15, original claim 
81 and 82 page 51 , original claim 84 at page 52, original claim 86 at page 52-53, 
original claims 40 and 41 at page 38 and original claims 88 to 90 at pages 53 - 
54 of the specification. , 

CLAIM 517 

Independent CLAIM 517 is directed to an apparatus comprising: 



Volume 2 



Page 182 of 199 



a superconductive current carrying element comprising a T c greater than or equal 
to 26 K 

the superconductive current carrying element comprises a metallic, oxygen- 
deficient, perovskite-like, mixed valent copper compound. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Volume 2 



Page 183 of 199 



CLAIM 518 

Dependent CLAIM 518 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 517, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element is at a temperature greater 
than or equal to 26 K 

Support can be found in original claim 58 at pages 42 -43 and at Page 4, lines 10 
-21 of the specification 

CLAIM 519 

Dependent CLAIM 519 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 517, further 
including a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductive current 
carrying element at a temperature less than the T c . 

Support can be found in original claim 58 at pages 42 -43 and at Page 4, lines 10 
-21 of the specification 

CLAIM 520 

Dependent CLAIM 520 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
517, 518 or 519, wherein the superconductive current carrying element 
comprises one or more of the group consisting of Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra, Sc, Y, 
La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho Er, Tm, Yb and Lu. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. The alkaline earth and 
rare earth elements include Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra, Sc, Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, 
Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, and Lu. 



Volume 2 



Page 184 of 199 



CLAIM 521 

Dependent CLAIM 521 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of 
claims 517, 518 or 519, wherein the superconductive current carrying element 
comprises one or more of Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba and Ra and one or more of Sc, Y, 
La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, Eu Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb and Lu. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. The alkaline earth and 
rare earth elements include Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra, Sc, Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, 
Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, and Lu. 

CLAIM 522 

Independent CLAIM 522 is directed to an apparatus comprising: 

a superconductive current carrying element comprising a T c greater than or 
equal to 26 K; 

the superconductive current carrying element comprises a composition that can 
be made according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21 , at page 20, line 1 to page 21 , line 2, page 12 lines 6-8 and page 18, line 20 
and in original claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. Support is found in 
original claim 10 at page 31 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 185 of 199 



Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 523 

Dependent CLAIM 523 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 522, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element is at a temperature greater 
than or equal to 26 K. 

Support can be found in original claim 58 at pages 42 -43 and at Page 4, lines 10 
-21 of the specification. 

CLAIM 524 

Dependent CLAIM 524 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 523, further 
including a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductive current 
carrying element at a temperature less than the T c . 

Support can be found in original claim 58 at pages 42 -43 and at Page 4, lines 10 
-21 of the specification 

CLAIM 525 

CLAIM 525 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 522, 523 or 524, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element comprises one or more of 
the group consisting of Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra, Sc, Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, 
Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb and Lu. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 



Volume 2 



Page 186 of 199 





found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. The alkaline earth and 
rare earth elements include Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra, Sc, Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, 
Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, and Lu. 



CLAIM 526 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 522, 523 or 524, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element comprises one or more of 
Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba and Ra and one or more of Sc, Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, 
Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb and Lu. 

Support is found in the specification page 3, lines 10-15, page 5, line 1 to page 6, 
line 14, the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the specification. Support is 
found in original claim 81 at page 51 of the specification. The alkaline earth and 
rare earth elements include Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra, Sc, Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, 
Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, and Lu. 



Dependent CLAIM 527 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 525, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element comprises a transition 
metal. 

Support can be found in original claims 40 and 41 at page 38, original claims 88 
and 90 at page 54 of the specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 528 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 526, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element comprises a transition 
metal. 



CLAIM 526 



CLAIM 527 



CLAIM 528 



Volume 2 



Page 187 of 199 





Support can be found in original claims 40 and 41 at page 38, original claims 88 
and 90 at page 54 of the specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 529 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 522, 
wherein the superconductive current carrying element comprises copper oxide. 

Support can be found in original claims 24 and 26 on pages 23 - 24 of the 
specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 530 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
522, 523 or 524, wherein the superconductive current carrying element is 
substantially perovskite. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Dependent CLAIM 531 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of 
claims 522, 523 or 524, wherein the superconductive current carrying element 
comprises a perovskite-like structure. 



CLAIM 529 



CLAIM 529 



CLAIM 531 



Volume 2 



Page 188 of 199 




Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 532 

Dependent CLAIM 532 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
522, 523 or 524, wherein the superconductive current carrying element 
comprises a perovskite related structure. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 533 

Dependent CLAIM 533 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
522, 523 or 524, wherein the superconductive current carrying element 
comprises a nonstoichiometric amount of oxygen. 

Support can be found at Page 1 1 , lines 9-16, page 26 line 13-15, original claim 
81 and 82 page 51 , original claim 84 at page 52, original claim 86 at page 52-53 
of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 189 of 199 




CLAIM 534 

Dependent CLAIM 534 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of claims 
522, 523 or 524, wherein the superconductive current carrying element 
comprises a layered structure. 

Support is found in original claim 32 at page 35 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claim 9 at page 30 of the specification. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 190, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 

CLAIM 535 

Independent CLAIM 535 is directed to an apparatus comprising a 
superconductor exhibiting a superconducting onset at an onset temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, the superconductor being comprised of at least 
four elements, none of which is a means for carrying a superconducting current 
at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, a temperature controller for 
maintaining the superconductor at an operating temperature in excess of the 
onset temperature to maintain the superconductor in a superconducting state 
and a current source for passing current through the superconductor while in the 
superconducting state. 

Support is found in original claim 40 at page 38 of the specification and in original 
claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 
58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 (page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 



Volume 2 



Page 190 of 199 




84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the specification), the title at page 1 of 
the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description 
at page 4, lines 10 to 21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, and page 18, line 
20. Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21; page 23, line 1 -9; and 
the paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 

Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the 
paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 

CLAIM 536 

CLAIM 536 is directed to an apparatus comprising: 

a means for carrying a superconductive current exhibiting a superconductive 
state at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, 

a cooler for cooling the composition to a temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K at which temperature the means for carrying a superconductive current 
exhibits the superconductive state, and 

a current source for passing an electrical current through the composition while 
the composition is in the superconductive state. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50),84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification), the title at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 
and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 21 , at page 20 line 1 to 
page 21, line 2 and page 18, line 20. Means for conducting a superconducting 
current at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K are described at page 3, 
line 1 to page 28, line 5 of the specification. Means for providing an electric 



Volume 2 Page 191 of 199 




current is a conventionally used source or current shown in Fig, 1 as the 
combination of elements 2 and 18. 

Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the 
paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 

CLAIM 537 

Independent CLAIM 537 is directed to an apparatus comprising: 

a metallic, oxygen-deficient, perovskite-like, mixed valent transition metal 
composition exhibiting a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, 

a temperature controller maintaining the composition at a temperature greater 
than or equal to 26°K at which temperature the composition exhibits the 
superconductive state, and 

a current source passing an electrical current through the composition while the 
composition is in the superconductive state. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50),84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification), the title at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 
and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 21 , at page 20 line 1 to 
page 21 , line 2 and page 1 8, line 20. Means for conducting a superconducting 
current at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K are described at page 3, 
line 1 to page 28, line 5 of the specification. Means for providing an electric 
current is a conventionally used source or current shown in Fig, 1 as the 
combination of elements 2 and 18. 



Volume 2 



Page 192 of 199 




Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the 
paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 

Support is found in Applicants' article, which is incorporated in Applicants 
specifications at page 6 (Brief Attachment AX) states at page 1 90, left Col., 
lines 14-16 from the bottom "X-ray powder diffractograms ... revealed three 
individual crystallographic phases." In the conclusion at page 192 the article 
states "[t]he system consists of three phases, one of them having a metallic 
perovskite-type layer-like structure." 



Dependent CLAIM 538 is directed to the apparatus of claim 537, where the 
means for carrying a superconductive current is comprised of a metal oxide. 

Support is in original claim 89 on page 54 of the specification. 



Dependent CLAIM 539 is directed to the apparatus of claim 537, where the 
means for carrying a superconductive current is comprised of a transition metal 
oxide. 

Support is in original claim 90 on page 54 of the specification. 



CLAIM 538 



CLAIM 539 



CLAIM 540 



Independent CLAIM 540 is directed to an apparatus comprising: 



Volume 2 



Page 193 of 199 




a composition comprising oxygen exhibiting a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, a temperature controller for 
maintaining the composition at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K at 
which temperature the composition exhibits the superconductive state, and 

a source of an electrical current through the composition while the composition is 
in the superconductive state. 

Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50),84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification), the title at page 1 of the specification and Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 
and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 21 , at page 20 line 1 to 
page 21 , line 2 and page 18, line 20. Means for conducting a superconducting 
current at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K are described at page 3, 
line 1 to page 28, line 5 of the specification. Means for providing an electric 
current is a conventionally used source or current shown in Fig, 1 as the 
combination of elements 2 and 18. 

Support is in the specification at page 4, lines 10-21 ; page 23, line 1-9; and the 
paragraph bridging pages 2 and 3. 

CLAIM 541 

Dependent CLAIM 541 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 540, where 
the composition is comprised of a metal oxide. 

Support is in original claim 89 on page 54 of the specification. 



Volume 2 



Page 194 of 199 



# 



CLAIM 542 

Dependent CLAIM 542 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 541 , where 
the composition is comprised of a transition metal oxide. 

Support is in original claim 90 on page 54 of the specification. 

CLAIM 543 

Independent CLAIM 543 is directed to a combination, comprising: 

an oxygen containing composition exhibiting the onset of a DC substantially zero 
resistance state at an onset temperature in excess of 30°K, and 

a current source for passing an electrical current through the composition while it 
is in the substantially zero resistance state. 

Support is found at page 10, lines 1-3, page 20, lines 1-5 of the specification. 
Support is found in original claims 1 (page 29), 12 (page 31), 24 (pages 33-34), 
36 (page 36), 55 (page 41), 58 (page 42), 59 (page 43), 64 (pages 44-45), 69 
(page 46), 77 (pages 49-50), 84 (page 52) and 88 (page 53 to 54) (of the 
specification) and 88 (page 53 to 54), the title at page 1 of the specification and 
Fig. 1 elements 20, 18 and 16 thereof and the description at page 4, lines 10 to 
21, at page 20, line 1 to page 21, line 2, and page 18, line 20 and in original 
claim 42 at page 38 of the specification. 

Means for providing an electric current is a conventionally used source or current 
shown in Fig, 1 as the combination of elements 2 and 18. 

CLAIMS 544 TO 550 WERE ADDED BY THE TWELFTH SUPPLEMENTARY 
RESPONSE WHICH WAS NOT ENETERED WHEN THIS APPEAL BRIEF 

WAS FILED 



Volume 2 



Page 195 of 199 



CLAIM 544 

Dependent CLAIM 544 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 535, 
wherein said superconductor can be made according to known principles of 
ceramic science. 



Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



CLAIM 545 



Dependent CLAIM 545 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 536, 
wherein said means for carrying a superconductive current can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



CLAIM 546 



Dependent CLAIM 546 is directed to an apparatus according to any one of 
claims 537, 538 or 539 wherein said composition can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 547 



Dependent CLAIM 547 is directed to an apparatus according to any one of 
claims 540, 541 or 542 wherein said composition can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science. 



Volume 2 



Page 196 of 199 



Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 548 

Dependent CLAIM 548 is directed to a combination according to claim 543, 
wherein said composition can be made according to known principles of 
ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 549 

Dependent CLAIM 549 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of 
claims 496 to 514 or 515, wherein said superconductive element can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 550 

Dependent CLAIM 550 is directed to an apparatus according to claim 516, 
wherein said means for carrying a superconductive current can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Volume 2 



Page 197 of 199 



Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 

CLAIM 551 

Dependent CLAIM 551 is directed to an apparatus according to anyone of 
claims 517 to 520 or 521 , wherein said superconductive current carrying element 
can be made according to known principles of ceramic science. 

Support is found in the specification at page 8, lines 19-13 and page 15, line 20- 
23. 



Volume 2 



Page 198 of 199 



* 



Please charge any fee necessary to enter this paper and any previous paper to 

deposit account 09-0468. 




Reg. No. 32,053 
(914) 945-3217 



IBM CORPORATION 
Intellectual Property Law Dept. 
P.O. Box 218 

Yorktown Heights, New York 10598 



Volume 2 



Page 199 of 199 



Jf IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 

In re Patent Application of Date: November 27, 2006 

Applicants: Bednorz et al. Docket: YO987-074BZ 

Serial No.: 08/479,810 Group Art Unit: 1751 

Filed: June 7, 1995 Examiner: M. Kopec 

For: NEW SUPERCONDUCTIVE COMPOUNDS HAVING HIGH TRANSITION 
TEMPERATURE, METHODS FOR THEIR USE AND PREPARATION 



Commissioner for Patents 

United States Patent and Trademark Office 

P.O. Box 1450 

Alexandria, VA 22313-1450 

APPEAL BRIEF 



Part VII 
CFR37§41.37(c)(1)(vll) 
Argument For the Patentability of Each Rejected Claim 



VOLUME 3 



Volume 3 



Page 1 of 575 



PRELIMINARY COMMENTS A 



All the claims are individually appealed except that the following claims are 
grouped in claims: 



1, 361 

2, 362 

6, 363 

7, 364 

8, 365 

9, 366 
17, 367 
19, 368 
23, 369 
32, 370 

52, 371 

53, 372 

58, 373 

59, 374 

72, 376 

73, 377 
75, 378 
82, 381 
94, 382 
96, 383 
149,389 

165, 394 

166, 395 
240, 402 

256, 407 

257, 408 



Volume 3 



Page 2 of 575 



Claim 379 should be allowed for the same reason that claim 77 is 

allowed. 



Claim 380 should be allowed for the same reason that claim 80. 

That is they recite a transition metal oxide continuity at least a) an alkaline earth 
element for Group II A element an b) a rare-earth element or Group III B 
element. 



Volume 3 



Page 3 of 575 



PRELIMINARY COMMENTS B 



Each rejected claim is appealed individually. In this part arguments are provided, 
for each claim individually, for why each claim is enabled in view of Applicants' 
teaching. Applicants do not rely on these enablement statements to provide a 
teaching that is missing from Applicants' teaching, but they corroborate the truth 
of Applicants' teaching an are therefore evidence that Applicants' claims are fully 
enabled by Applicants' teaching. For convenience in the comments Applicants 
will use the following shorthand notation which are defined below: 

• Examiners' First Enablement Statement 

• Examiners' Second Enablement Statement 

• Examiners' Third Enablement Statement 

• Poole 1988 Enablement Statement 

• Poole 1995 Enablement Statement 

• Poole 1996 Enablement Statement 

• Schuller Enablement Statement 

• Rao enablement Statement 

EXAMINER'S FIRST ENABLEMENT STATEMENT 

At page 8 of the Final Action the Examiner states (this is referred to herein as the 

Examiner's First Enablement Statement): 

The Examiner does not deny that the instant application includes "all know 
principles of ceramic science", or that once a person of skill in the art knows of a 
specific type of composition which is superconducting at greater than or equal to 
26K, such a person of skill in the art, using the techniques described in the 
application, which included all principles of ceramic fabrication known at the time 
the application was initially filed, can make the known superconductive 
compositions. The numerous 1.132 declarations, such as those of Mitzi, Shaw, 
Dinger and Duncombee, and the Rao article, are directed to production of know 
superconductive materials. (Emphasis in the original) 

Thus the Examiner agrees that "a person of skill in the art, using the 
techniques described in the application, which included all principles of ceramic 
fabrication known at the time the application was initially filed, can make the 



Volume 3 



Page 4 of 575 



known superconductive compositions." The principals of ceramic science taught 
by Applicants to fabricate high Tc Superconductors were known long before 
Applicants' discovery. 

EXAMINER'S SECOND ENABLEMENT STATEMENT 

The Examiner has essentially said this by rejecting Applicants' non-allowed 
claims as anticipated under §1 02(a) or obvious under §1 03(a) in view of the 
Asahi Shinbum article (Brief Attachment AV) at page 16 of the Office Action 
dated 07/30/1998. In regards to the rejection of claims 1 , 1 3-31 , 33-38, 40-46, 
55-59, 64, 67-72, 77-81, 84-86, 91-96, 103, 109, 111-116, 119, 120 and 124 
under 35 USC 103(a) over the Asahi Shinbum article the Examiner states at 
page 17 of the Office Action dated 07/30/1998 "based on the teachings of the 
Asahi Shinbum article as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of such skill 
because that reference teaches superconductivity in an oxide compound of La 
and Cu with Ba having a structure of the so-called perovskite structure". In the 
Office Action of 07/30/1998 claim 123 was allowed over the Asahi Shinbum 
article because it showed criticality for the formula recited in this claim. 

The English translation of the Ashai Shinbum Article is page 2 of Brief 
Attachment AV. 

The Asahi Shinbum article states in the first paragraph: 

A new ceramic with a very high Tc of 30K of the superconducting transition has 
been found. The possibility of high Tc - superconductivity has been reported by 
scientists in Switzerland this spring. The group of Prof. Shoji TANAKA, Dept. 
Appl. Phys. Faculty of Engineering at the University of Tokyo confirmed in 
November, that this is true. 

and in the second paragraph: 

The ceramic newly discovered, is an oxide compound of La and Cu with 
Barium which has a structure of the so-called perovskite and shows metal-like 
properties. Prof. Tanaka's laboratory confirmed that this material shows 



Volume 3 



Page 5 of 575 




diamagnitism (Meisner effect) which is the most important indication of the 
existence of superconductivity. 

The Swiss scientist are the inventors (Applicants) of the present 
application. Thus this clearly refers to Applicants' work which was reported in 
Applicants' article (Brief Attachment AX) which is incorporated by reference in 
the present application. These passages say that Prof. Tanaka confirmed 
Applicants' work. The newly discovered ceramic referred to in the article is the 
ceramic reported on in Applicants' article. It is thus clear that for the Examiner 
to have rejected Applicants' claim over the Asahi Shinbum article under 35 
USC 103, the Examiner necessarily had to find that Applicants' article fully 
enabled their claims. (This is the Examiner's Second Enablement Statement) 
The 35 USC 103 rejection over the Asahi Shinbum article was overcome by 
Applicants swearing behind the date of the Ashai Shinbum article. 

EXAMINER'S THIRD ENABLEMENT STATEMENT 

In the 07/053,307 ancestral application, in Office Action dated 04/20/91 (Brief 
Attachment AR) composition claims 1 , 2, 5 through 1 1 inclusive, 40 through 44 
inclusive, 46, 48, 51 through 54 inclusive, 60, 62, and 66 were finally rejected 
under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) or in the alternative under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable 
over seven prior art references. Applicants rebutted the Examiner's reasons for 
rejection based on limitations in the claims directed to Applicants' new discovery 
of the superconductive properties of these materials. In the 07/053,307 
ancestral application final Office Action the Examiner asserted that the cited 
references appeared to disclose materials, which inherently provided 
superconductive properties and consequently therefore, rendered the 
composition claims unpatentable. Since a rejection of the composition of matter 
claims reciting the high Tc property based on inherency necessarily requires that 
the recited alleged inherent claimed high Tc property is a necessary 
consequence of the prior art description of compositions of matter, the rejection 
for inherency necessarily requires that a person of skill in the art be able to make 



Volume 3 



Page 6 of 575 



the compositions of matter described in the prior art which necessarily means 
that it was and is the Examiner's position that a person of skill in the art is 
enabled to make high Tc compositions of matter. This is the Examiner's Third 
Enablement Statement. Applicants claims under appeal are directed to an 
apparatus, device, structure, etc. using high Tc compositions of matter and 
based on the Examiner's Third Enablement Statement these claims are enabled. 

POOLE 1988 ENABLEMENT STATEMENT 

The chemistry involved in the process of making high Tc superconductor 
compositions does not have to be understood to fabricate samples as stated in 
the book "Copper Oxide Superconductors" by Charles P. Poole, et al. 1988 (See 
48 of DST AFFIDAVITS (Brief Attachment AM, AN and AO and Brief Attachment 
AW) which states at page 59: 

[c]opper oxide superconductors with a purity sufficient to exhibit zero resistivity or 
to demonstrate levitation (Early) are not difficult to synthesize. We believe that 
this is at least partially responsible for the explosive worldwide growth in these 
materials. 

Poole further states at page 61 : 

[i]n this section three methods of preparation will be described, namely, the solid 
state, the coprecipitation, and the sol-gel techniques (Hatfi). The widely used 
solid-state technique permits off-the-shelf chemicals to be directly calcined into 
superconductors, and it requires little familiarity with the subtle physicochemical 
process involved in the transformation of a mixture of compounds into a 
superconductor. 

Since skilled artisans can fabricate samples without knowing the chemistry and 
without a detailed theory thus this art is predictable. All that is needed is routine 
experimentation to fabricate samples. There is no evidence to the contrary. The 
Examiner has cited no evidence to the contrary and has presented no argument 
to the contrary. This is the Poole 1988 Enablement Statement. 



Volume 3 



Page 7 of 575 



POOLE 1995 ENABLEMENT STATEMENT 

Charles Poole et al. published another book in 1 995 entitled Superconductivity" 
Academic Press which has a Chapter 7 on "Perovskite and Cuprate 
Crystallographic Structures". (Brief Attachment Z). This book will be referred to 
as Poole 1995. 

At page 179 of Poole 1995 states: 

V. PEROVSKITE-TYPE SUPERCONDUCTING STRUCTURES 
In their first report on high-temperature superconductors Bednorz and Muller 
(1986) referred to their samples as "metallic, oxygen-deficient ... perovskite-like 
mixed-valence copper compounds." Subsequent work has confirmed that the 
new superconductors do indeed possess these characteristics. 

Thus Poole 1 988 states that the high Tc superconducting materials "are not 
difficult to synthesize" and Poole 1995 states that "the new superconductors do 
indeed possess [the] characteristics" that Applicants' specification describes 
these new superconductors to have. 
This is the Poole 1995 Enablement Statement. 

POOLE 1996 ENABLEMENT STATEMENT 

Paragraph 48 of each DST AFFIDAVIT (Brief Attachments AM, AN and AO) 
note that the book "The New Superconductors", by Frank J. Owens and Charles 
P. Poole, Plenum Press, 1996, referred to herein as Poole 1996 in Chapter 8 
entitled "New High Temperature Superconductors" starting a page 97 (See Brief 
Attachment AG) shows in Section 8.3 starting at page 98 entitled "Layered 
Structure of the Cuprates" schematic diagrams of the layered structure of the 
cuprate superconductors. Poole 1996 states in the first sentence of Section 8.3 
at page 98 "All cuprate superconductors have the layered structure shown in Fig. 
8.1 ." This is consistent with the teaching of Bednorz and Mueller that "These 
compositions have a layer-type Crystalline Structure often Perovskite-like" as 
noted in paragraph 14 of each of the DST AFFIDAVITS (above). Poole 1996 
further states in the first sentence of Section 8.3 at page 98 "The flow of 



Volume 3 



Page 8 of 575 



supercurrent takes place in conduction layers and bonding layers support and 
hold together the conduction layers". The caption of Fig. 8.1 states "Layering 
scheme of the cuprate superconductors". Fig. 8.3 shows details of the 
conduction layers for difference sequence of copper oxide planes and Fig. 8.4 
presents details of the bonding layers for several of the cuprates which include 
binding layers for lanthanum superconductor La2Cu04, neodymium 
superconductor Nd2Cu04, yttrium superconductor YBa2Cu302n+4, bismuth 
superconductor Bi2Sr2Can-1 Cun02n+4, thallium superconductor TI2Ba2Can- 
1Cun02n+4, and mercury superconductor HgBa2Can-1Cun02n+2. Fig. 8.5 at 
pages 102 and 103 show a schematic atomic structure showing the layering 
scheme for thallium superconductors. Fig. 8.10 at page 109 shows a schematic 
crystal structure showing the layering scheme for La2Cu04. Fig. 8.1 1 at page 
1 10 shows a schematic crystal structure showing the layering scheme for 
HgBa2Ca2Cu308+x. Paragraph 48 of each DST AFFIDAVIT states that "[t]he 
layering shown in Poole 1996 for high Tc superconductors is consistent with the 
layering as taught by Bednorz and Mueller in their patent application." This is 
the Poole 1996 Enablement Statement. 

SCHULLER ENABLEMENT STATEMENT 

Page 4 of the Final Rejection which cites Schuller et al "A Snapshot View of High 
Temperature Superconductivity 2002" (report from workshop on High 
Temperature Superconductivity held April 5-8, 2002 in San Diego) which the 
Examiner states "discusses both the practical applications and theoretical 
mechanisms relating to superconductivity." 

"empirical searches in the oxides gave rise to many superconducting systems" 

Schuller is acknowledging that experimental researchers using intuition and 
systematic searches found the other known high Tc superconductors. 
Systematic searching is applying what is known to the experimental solid state 
scientist, that is, knowledge of how to fabricate compounds of the same class as 



Volume 3 



Page 9 of 575 



the compounds in which Bednorz and Muller first discovered High Tc 
superconductivity. 

"empirical searches in the oxides gave rise to many superconducting systems" 

Schuller states "Of course, 'enlightened' empirical searches either guided by 
chemical and materials intuition or systematic searches using well-defined 
strategies may prove to be fruitful. It is interesting to note that while empirical 
searches in the oxides gave rise to many superconducting systems, similar 
(probable?) searches after the discovery of superconductivity in MgB2 have not 
uncovered any new superconductors." Schuller is acknowledging that 
experimental researchers using intuition and systematic searches found the other 
known high Tc superconductors. Systematic searching is applying what is 
known to the experimental solid state scientist, that is, knowledge of how to 
fabricate compounds of the same class as the compounds in which Bednorz and 
Muller first discovered High Tc superconductivity. This is the Schuller 
Enablement Statement. 

RAO ENABLEMENT STATEMENT 

The article of Rao et al. (Brief Attachment AB) states at pagel , first paragraph 
of left column: 

Several methods of synthesis have been employed for preparing cuprates, with 
the objective of obtaining pure monophasic products with good superconducting 
characteristics [3, 4]. The most common method of synthesis of cuprate 
superconductors is the traditional ceramic method which has been employed for 
the preparation of a large variety of oxide materials [5]. Although the ceramic 
method has yielded many of the cuprates with satisfactory characteristics, 
different synthetic strategies have become necessary in order to control factors 
such as the cation composition, oxygen stoichiometry, cation oxidation states 
and carrier concentration. Specifically noteworthy amongst these methods are 
chemical or solution routes which permit better mixing of the constituent cations 



Volume 3 



Page 10 of 575 



in order to reduce the diffusion distance in the solid state [5, 6]. Such methods 
include coprecipitation, use of precursors, the sol-gel method and the use of 
alkali fluxes. The combustion method or self-propagating high-temperature 
synthesis (SHS) has also been employed. 

Reference 5 of the Rao et al., article is another example of a reference to the 
general principles of ceramic science incorporated into Applicants' teaching. The 
Rao et al. article states that the 29 materials reported on in the article and listed 
in Table 1 thereof are fabricated using the general principles of ceramic science. 
Moreover, the Rao article states that these materials are fabricated by what the 
Rao article calls the "ceramic method" which is the preferred embodiment in 
Applicants' specification, yet 12 of the 29 materials in Table 1 do not come within 
the scope of the claims allowed by the Examiner. Thus known examples 
fabricated according to Applicants' teaching will not literally come within the 
scope of the claims so far allowed to Applicants. All 29 materials of Table 1 are 
fabricated through experimentation, i.e., without undue experimentation as 
shown in the affidavits in Brief Attachments AH, Al, AJ, AK, AL, AM, AN and AO 
and Poole 1988 (Brief Attachments AF and AW) Poole 1995 (Brief Attachment 
W) Poole 1996 (Brief Attachment AG) and the Rao article (Brief Attachment 
AB). This is the Rao Enablement Statement. 

PRELIMINARY COMMENTS C 

The recited language of the following claims: 1,12. 24, 27, 34, 36, 40, 42, 46, 
55, 57, 58, 59, 64, 69, 77, 84, 86, 71, 93, 96, 103, 109, 123, 130, 135, 137, 139, 
140, 361, 373, 374, 379, 383, 386, 438, 496, 497, 535, 543; includes the 
modifications made in the Thirteenth Supplemental Response submitted 
1 1/25/2006 (unentered at the time of submission of this Brief) to use the terms 
"current source" and "temperature controller" used in allowed claims. Summary 
of the following claims: 218, 222, 229, 309, 313, 320, 466, 476, 517, 522, 467, 
477, 5128 and 523 include the correction of the typographical errors mode in the 



Volume 3 



Page 11 of 575 



Thirteenth Supplemental Response submitted 1 1/25/2006 (unentered at the time 
of submission of this Brief). 



Volume 3 



Page 12 of 575 



ARGUMENTS FOR THE PATENTABILITY OF 
EACH CLAIM INDIVIDUALLY 
CLAIM 1 

Claim 1 recites: 

CLAIM 1 A superconducting apparatus comprising a 
composition having a transition temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, the composition including a rare earth or rare 
earth-like element, a transition metal element capable of 
exhibiting multivalent states and oxygen, including at least 
one phase that exhibits superconductivity at temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, a temperature controller for 
maintaining said composition at said temperature to exhibit 
said superconductivity and a current source for passing an 
electrical superconducting current through said composition 
while exhibiting said superconductivity. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants 1 evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombee, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 13 of 575 



CLAIM 2 



Claim 2 recites: 

CLAIM 2 The superconducting apparatus of claim 1, further 
including an alkaline earth element substituted for at least 
one atom of said rare earth or rare earth-like element in said 
composition. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 14 of 575 



CLAIM 3 



Claim 3 recites: 

CLAIM 3 The superconducting apparatus of claim 2, where 
said transition metal is Cu . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 15 of 575 



CLAIM 4 



Claim 4 recites: 

CLAIM 4 The superconducting apparatus of claim 3, where 
said alkaline earth element is selected from the group 
consisting of B. Ca. Ba. and Sr . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 16 of 575 



CLAIM 5 



Claim 5 recites: 

CLAIM 5 The superconducting apparatus of claim 1 , where said 
transition metal element is selected from the group consisting of 
Cu. Ni. and Cr . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 17 of 575 



CLAIM 6 



Claim 6 recites: 

CLAIM 6 The superconducting apparatus of claim 2, where said 
rare earth or rare earth-like element is selected from the group 
consisting of La. Nd. and Ce . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 18 of 575 



CLAIM 7 

Claim 7 recites: 



CLAIM 7 The superconducting apparatus of claim 1 , where said 
phase is crystalline with a perovskite-like structure . 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 19 of 575 



CLAIM 8 



Claim 8 recites: 

CLAIM 8 The superconducting apparatus of claim 2, where 
said phase is crystalline with a perovskite-like structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 20 of 575 



CLAIM 9 



Claim 9 recites: 

CLAIM 9 The superconducting apparatus of claim 1 , where 
said phase exhibits a laver-like crystalline structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants* teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 21 of 575 



CLAIM 10 



Claim 1 0 recites: 

CLAIM 10 The superconducting apparatus of claim 1 , where said 
phase is a mixed copper oxide phase . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 22 of 575 



CLAIM 11 



Claim 1 1 recites: 

CLAIM 1 1 The superconducting apparatus of claim 1 , where said 
composition is comprised of mixed oxides with alkaline earth 
doping . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 23 of 575 



CLAIM 12 



Claim 12 recites: 

CLAIM 12 A superconducting combination, comprising a 
superconductive oxide having a transition temperature greater than 
or equal to 26°K, 

A current siurce for passing a superconducting electrical current 
through said composition while said composition is at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and less than said 
transition temperature, and 

a temperature controller for cooling said composition to a 
superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 24 of 575 




Applicant notes that the Schuller Enablement Statement specifically states that 
systematic study in the oxides give rise to many high Tc systems. A systematic 
study is what a person of ordinary skill in the art knows how to do. 



Volume 3 



Page 25 of 575 



• 



CLAIM 13 

Claim 13 recites: 

CLAIM 13 The combination of claim 12, where said 
superconductive composition includes a transition metal oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 26 of 575 



CLAIM 14 

Claim 14 recites: 

CLAIM 14 The combination of claim 12, where said 
superconductive composition includes Cu-oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 27 of 575 



CLAIM 15 

Claim 15 recites: 

CLAIM 15 The combination of claim 12, where said 
superconductive composition includes a multivalent 
transition metal, oxygen, and at least one additional element . 

CLAIM 16 The combination of claim 15, where said transition metal is Cu. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 28 of 575 



CLAIM 16 



Claim 1 6 recites: 

CLAIM 16 The combination of claim 15, where said 
transition metal is Cu . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 29 of 575 



CLAIM 17 



Claim 1 7 recites: 

CLAIM 1 7 The combination of claim 15, where said 
additional element is a rare earth or rare earth-like element . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 30 of 575 



CLAIM 18 

Claim 18 recites: 

CLAIM 18 The combination of claim 15, where said 
additional element is an alkaline earth element. 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 31 of 575 



CLAIM 19 



Claim 19 recites: 

CLAIM 19 The combination of claim 12, where said composition 
includes a perovskite-like superconducting phase . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 32 of 575 



CLAIM 20 

Claim 20 recites: 

CLAIM 20 The combination of claim 12, where said composition 
includes a substituted transition metal oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 33 of 575 




CLAIM 21 

Claim 21 recites: 

CLAIM 21 The combination of claim 20, where said substituted 
transition metal oxide includes a multivalent transition metal 
element . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 34 of 575 




CLAIM 22 

Claim 22 recites: 

CLAIM 22 The combination of claim 20, where said substituted 
transition metal oxide is an oxide of copper . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 35 of 575 



CLAIM 23 

Claim 23 recites: 

CLAIM 23 The combination of claim 20, where said 
substituted transition metal oxide has a laver-like structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants 1 teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 36 of 575 



CLAIM 24 

Claim 24 recites: 

CLAIM 24 An apparatus comprising: 

a transition metal oxide having a phase therein which 
exhibits a superconducting state at a critical temperature 
greater than or equal to of 26°K, 

a temperature controller for lowering the temperature of said 
material at least to said critical temperature to produce said 
superconducting state in said phase, and 

a current source for passing an electrical superconducting 
current through said transition metal oxide while it is in said 
superconducting state. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 



Volume 3 



Page 37 of 575 



Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 38 of 575 



CLAIM 25 



Claim 25 recites: 

CLAIM 25 The apparatus of claim 24, where said transition 
metal oxide is comprised of a transition metal capable of 
exhibiting multivalent states . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 39 of 575 



CLAIM 26 



Claim 26 recites: 

CLAIM 26 The apparatus of claim 24, where said transition 
metal oxide is comprised of a Cu oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 40 of 575 



CLAIM 27 



Claim 27 recites: 

CLAIM 27 A superconducting apparatus comprising a 
composition having a transition temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, said composition being a substituted Cu-oxide 
including a superconducting phase having a structure which 
is structurally substantially similar to the orthorhombic- 
tetraaonal phase of said composition, a temperature 
controller for maintaining said composition at a temperature 
greater than or equal to said transition temperature to put 
said composition in a superconducting state; and a current 
source for passing current through said composition while in 
said superconducting state. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 41 of 575 



CLAIM 28 



Claim 28 recites: 

CLAIM 28 The superconducting apparatus of claim 27, 
where said substituted Cu-oxide includes a rare earth or rare 
earth-like element . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 42 of 575 



CLAIM 29 



Claim 29 recites: 

CLAIM 29 The superconducting apparatus of claim 27, 
where said substituted Cu-oxide includes an alkaline earth 
element . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 43 of 575 



CLAIM 30 



Claim 30 recites: 

CLAIM 30 The superconducting apparatus of claim 29, 
where said alkaline earth element is atomicallv large with 
respect to Cu . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants 1 evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 44 of 575 



CLAIM 31 



Claim 31 recites: 

CLAIM 31 The superconducting apparatus of claim 27, 
where said composition has a crystalline structure which 
enhances electron-phonon interactions to produce 
superconductivity at a temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K. 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 45 of 575 




CLAIM 32 



Claim 32 recites: 



CLAIM 32 The superconducting apparatus of claim 31, 
where said crystalline structure is laver-like. enhancing the 
number of Jahn-Teller polarons in said composition . 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 46 of 575 



CLAIM 33 



Claim 33 recites: 

CLAIM 33 A superconducting apparatus comprising a 
composition having a superconducting onset temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, the composition being 
comprised of a copper oxide doped with an alkaline earth 
element where the concentration of said alkaline earth 
element is near to the concentration of said alkaline earth 
element where the superconducting copper oxide phase in 
said composition undergoes an orthorhombic to tetragonal 
structural phase transition . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants 1 evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 47 of 575 



CLAIM 34 



Claim 34 recites: 

CLAIM 34 A superconducting apparatus having a 
superconducting onset temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K, the composition being comprised of a mixed copper 
oxide doped with an element chosen to result in Cu3+ ions in 
said composition and a current source for passing a 
superconducting current through said superconducting 
composition. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants 1 evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 48 of 575 



CLAIM 35 



Claim 35 recites: 

CLAIM 35 The superconducting apparatus of claim 34, 
where said doping element includes an alkaline earth 
element . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 49 of 575 



CLAIM 36 



Claim 36 recites: 

CLAIM 36 A combination comprising: 

a composition having a superconducting onset temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, said composition being 
comprised of a substituted copper oxide exhibiting mixed 
valence states and at least one other element in its 
crystalline structure, 

a current source for passing a superconducting electrical 
current through said composition while said composition is at 
a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and less than 
said superconducting onset temperature, and 

a temperature controller for cooling said composition to a 
superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 



Volume 3 



Page 50 of 575 




Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 51 of 575 



CLAIM 37 

Claim 37 recites: 

CLAIM 37 The combination of claim 36, where said at least 
one other element is an alkaline earth element . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 52 of 575 



CLAIM 38 

Claim 38 recites: 

CLAIM 38 The combination of claim 36, where said at least 
one other element is an element which results in Cu3+ ions 
in said composition . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 53 of 575 




CLAIM 39 

Claim 39 recites: 

CLAIM 39 The combination of claim 36, where said at least 
one other element is an element chosen to result in the 
presence of both Cu2+ and Cu3+ ions in said composition. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 54 of 575 



CLAIM 40 



Claim 40 recites: 

CLAIM 40 An apparatus comprising a superconductor 
exhibiting a superconducting onset at an onset temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, said superconductor being 
comprised of at least four elements, none of which is itself 
superconducting at a temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K . a temperature controller for maintaining said 
superconductor at an operating temperature in excess of 
said onset temperature to maintain said superconductor in a 
superconducting state and a current source for passing 
current through said superconductor while in said 
superconducting state. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 55 of 575 



CLAIM 41 



Claim 41 recites: 

CLAIM 41 The apparatus of claim 40, where said elements 
include a transition metal and oxygen . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 56 of 575 



CLAIM 42 



Claim 42 recites: 

CLAIM 42 A apparatus having a superconducting onset 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, said 
superconductor being a doped transition metal oxide, where 
said transition metal is itself non-superconducting and a 
current source for passing a superconducting electric current 
through said composition. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 57 of 575 



CLAIM 43 



Claim 43 recites: 

CLAIM 43 The apparatus of claim 42, where said doped 
transition metal oxide is multivalent in said superconductor. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 58 of 575 



CLAIM 44 



Claim 44 recites: 

CLAIM 44 The apparatus of claim 42, further including an 
element which creates a mixed valent state of said transition 
metal . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 59 of 575 




CLAIM 45 

Claim 45 recites: 

CLAIM 45 The apparatus of claim 43, where said transition 
metal is Cu . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 60 of 575 




CLAIM 46 

Claim 46 recites: 

CLAIM 46 An apparatus having a superconductor having a 
superconducting onset temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K, said superconductor being an oxide having multivalent 
oxidation states and including a metal, said oxide having a 
crystalline structure which is oxygen deficient and a current 
source for passing a superconducting electric current 
through said superconductor. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 61 of 575 




CLAIM 47 

Claim 47 recites: 

CLAIM 47 The apparatus of claim 46, where said transition 
metal is Cu . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 62 of 575 





CLAIM 48 



Claim 48 recites: 



CLAIM 48 A superconductive apparatus comprising a 
superconductive composition comprised of a transition metal 
oxide having substitutions therein, the amount of said 
substitutions being sufficient to produce sufficient electron- 
phonon interactions in said composition that said 
composition exhibits a superconducting onset at 
temperatures greater than or equal to 26°K, and a source of 
current for passing a superconducting electric current 
through said superconductor. 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 63 of 575 



* 



CLAIM 49 

Claim 49 recites: 

CLAIM 49 The superconductive apparatus of claim 48, 
where said transition metal oxide is multivalent in said 
composition . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 64 of 575 



CLAIM 50 

Claim 50 recites: 

CLAIM 50 The superconductive apparatus of claim 48, 
where said transition metal is Cu . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 65 of 575 



CLAIM 51 



Claim 51 recites: 

CLAIM 51 The superconductive apparatus of claim 48, where said 
substitutions include an alkaline earth element . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 66 of 575 



CLAIM 52 



Claim 52 recites: 

CLAIM 52 The superconductive apparatus of claim 48, 
where said substitutions include a rare earth or rare earth- 
like element . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 67 of 575 



CLAIM 53 



Claim 53 recites: 

CLAIM 53 A superconductive apparatus comprised of a 
copper oxide having a laver-like crystalline structure and at 
least one additional element substituted in said crystalline 
structure, said structure being oxygen deficient and 
exhibiting a superconducting onset temperature greater than 
or equal to 26°K. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants 1 teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim- 



Volume 3 



Page 68 of 575 



CLAIM 54 



Claim 54 recites: 

CLAIM 54 The superconductor of claim 53, where said 
additional element creates a mixed valent state of said 
copper oxide in said superconductor. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 69 of 575 





CLAIM 55 



Claim 55 recites: 



CLAIM 55 A combination, comprising: 



a transition metal oxide having an superconducting onset 
temperature greater than about 26°K and having an oxygen 
deficiency , said transition metal being non-superconducting 
at said superconducting onset temperature and said oxide 
having multivalent states . 

a current source for passing an electrical superconducting 
current through said oxide while said oxide is at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, and 

temperature controller for cooling said oxide in a 
superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K. 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants 1 evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 



Volume 3 



Page 70 of 575 




particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 71 of 575 



CLAIM 56 



CLAIM recites: 

CLAIM 56 The combination of claim 55, where said 
transition metal is Cu . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 72 of 575 



CLAIM 57 



Claim 57 recites: 

CLAIM 57 A combination including; 

a superconducting oxide having a superconducting onset 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and containing at 
least 3 elements which are non-superconductino at said 
onset temperature . 

a current source for passing a superconducting current 
through said oxide while said oxide is maintained at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, and 

temperature controller for maintaining said oxide in a 
superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K and less than said superconductive onset 
temperature. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 



Volume 3 



Page 73 of 575 



particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 74 of 575 




CLAIM 58 

Claim 58 recites: 

CLAIM 58 A combination, comprised of: 

a copper oxide superconductor having a superconductor 
onset temperature greater than about 26°K including an 
element which results in a mixed valent state in said oxide, 
said oxide being crystalline and having a laver-like structure . 

a current source for passing a superconducting current 
through said copper oxide while it is maintained at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and less than said 
superconducting onset temperature, and 

temperature controller for cooling said copper oxide to a 
superconductive state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K and less than said superconducting onset 
temperature. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants 1 teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 



Volume 3 



Page 75 of 575 




Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 76 of 575 




CLAIM 59 

Claim 59 recites: 

CLAIM 59 A combination, comprised of: 

a ceramic-like material having an onset of superconductivity 
at an onset temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, 

a current source for passing a superconducting electrical 
current through said ceramic-like material while said material 
is maintained at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K 
and less than said onset temperature, and 

temperature controller for cooling said superconducting 
ceramic-like material to a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and less than said 
onset temperature, said material being superconductive at 
temperatures below said onset temperature and a ceramic at 
temperatures above said onset temperature. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 



Volume 3 



Page 77 of 575 



Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 78 of 575 



CLAIM 60 



Claim 60 recites: 

CLAIM 60 An apparatus comprised of a transition metal 
oxide , and at least one additional element , said 
superconductor having a distorted crystalline structure 
characterized bv an oxvaen deficiency and exhibiting a 
superconducting onset temperature greater than or equal to 
of 26°K, a source of current for passing a superconducting 
electric current in said transition metal oxide, and a cooling 
apparatus for maintaining said transition metal oxide below 
said onset temperature at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 79 of 575 



CLAIM 61 

Claim 61 recites: 

CLAIM 61 The apparatus of claim 60, where said transition 
metal is Cu . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 80 of 575 



CLAIM 62 



Claim 62 recites: 

CLAIM 62 An apparatus comprised of a transition metal 
oxide and at least one additional element , said 
superconductor having a distorted crystalline structure 
characterized bv an oxvaen excess and exhibiting a 
superconducting onset temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K, a source of current for passing a superconducting 
electric current in said transition metal oxide, and a cooling 
apparatus for maintaining said transition metal oxide below 
said onset temperature and at a temperature greater than or 
equal to of 26°K. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 81 of 575 



CLAIM 63 



Claim 63 recites: 

CLAIM 63 The apparatus of claim 62, where said transition 
metal is Cu . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 82 of 575 



CLAIM 64 

Claim 64 recites: 



CLAIM 64 A combination, comprising: 



a mixed copper oxide composition having enhanced oolaron 
formation , said composition including an element causing 
said copper to have a mixed valent state in said composition, 
said composition further having a distorted octahedral 
oxvoen environment leading to a Tc greater than or equal to 
26°K, 



a current source for providing a superconducting current 
through said composition at temperatures greater than or 
equal to 26°K and less than said Tc, and 



temperature controller for cooling said composition to a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and less than said 
Tc. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 



Volume 3 



Page 83 of 575 



Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 84 of 575 





CLAIM 65 



Claim 65 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 65 An apparatus comprising a composition 
exhibiting superconductivity at temperatures greater than or 
equal to 26°K, said composition being a ceramic-like 
material in the RE-AE-TM-0 system, where RE is a rare 
earth or near rare earth element, AE is an alkaline earth 
element, TM is a multivalent transition metal element having 
at least two valence states in said composition, and O is 
oxvoen . the ratio of the amounts of said transition metal in 
said two valence states being determined bv the ratio RE : 
AE . a source of current for passing a superconducting 
electric current in said transition metal oxide, and a cooling 
apparatus for maintaining said transition metal oxide below 
said onset temperature and at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K. 



Volume 3 



Page 85 of 575 



CLAIM 66 

Claim 66 recites: 



CLAIM 66 An apparatus comprising a superconductive 
composition having a transition temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, the composition including a multivalent 
transition metal oxide and at least one additional element, 
said composition having a distorted orthorhombic crystalline 
structure , a source of current for passing a superconducting 
electric current in said transition metal oxide, and a cooling 
apparatus for maintaining said transition metal oxide below 
said onset temperature and at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K. 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 86 of 575 





CLAIM 67 



Claim 67 recites: 



CLAIM 67 The apparatus of claim 66, where said transition 
metal oxide is a mixed copper oxide . 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 87 of 575 



CLAIM 68 



Claim 68 recites: 

CLAIM 68 The apparatus of claim 67, where said one 
additional element is an alkaline earth element . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants 1 teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 88 of 575 




CLAIM 69 

Claim 69 recites: 

CLAIM 69 A superconductive combination, comprising: 

a superconducting composition exhibiting a superconducting 
transition temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, said 
composition being a transition metal oxide having a distorted 
orthorhombic crystalline structure , and 

a current source for passing a superconducting electrical 
current through said composition while said composition is at 
a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and less than 
said superconducting transition temperature. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 89 of 575 



CLAIM 70 

Claim 70 recites: 

CLAIM 70 The combination of claim 69, where said 
transition metal oxide is a mixed cooper oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 90 of 575 



CLAIM 71 



Claim 71 recites: 

CLAIM 71 The combination of claim 70, where said mixed 
copper oxide includes an alkaline earth element . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 91 of 575 




CLAIM 72 

Claim 72 recites: 

CLAIM 72 The combination of claim 71 , where said mixed 
copper oxide further includes a rare earth or rare earth-like 
element . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 92 of 575 




CLAIM 73 

Claim 73 which is withdrawn recites: 

CLAIM 73 An apparatus comprising a composition of matter 
comprising a superconducting onset temperature greater 
than or equal to 26°K, said composition of matter made by a 
method comprising the steps of: 

preparing powders of oxygen-containing compounds of a 
rare earth or rare earth-like element, an alkaline earth 
element, and copper, 

mixing said compounds and firing said mixture to create a 
mixed copper oxide composition including said alkaline earth 
element and said rare earth or rare earth-like element, and 

annealing said mixed copper oxide composition at an 
elevated temperature less than about 950°C in an 
atmosphere including oxygen to produce a superconducting 
composition having a mixed copper oxide phase exhibiting a 
superconducting onset temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K, said superconducting composition having a layer-like 
crystalline structure after said annealing step. 



Volume 3 



Page 93 of 575 



CLAIM 74 



CLAIM 74 is withdrawn 

CLAIM 75 

Claim 75 is withdrawn 

CLAIM 76 

CLAIM 76 is withdrawn 

CLAIM 77 

Claim 77 which is allowed recites: 
CLAIM 77 A combination, comprising: 

a mixed copper oxide composition including an alkaline earth element (AE) and a 
rare earth or rare earth-like element (RE), said composition having a layer-like 
crystalline structure and multi-valent oxidation states, said composition exhibiting 
a substantially zero resistance to the flow of electrical current therethrough when 
cooled to a superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, 
said mixed copper oxide having a superconducting onset temperature greater 
than or equal to 26°K, and 

electrical means for passing an electrical superconducting current through said 
composition when said composition exhibits substantially zero resistance at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and less than said onset temperature. 



Volume 3 



Page 94 of 575 



• 



CLAIM 78 

CLAIM 78 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 78 The combination of claim 77, where the ratio (AE.RE) : Cu is 
substantially 1:1. 

CLAIM 79 

Claim 79 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 79 The combination of claim 77, where the ratio (AE.RE) : Cu is 
substantially 1:1. 

CLAIM 80 

Claim 80 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 80 The combination of claim 77, wherein said crystalline structure is 
perovskite-like. 

CLAIM 81 

CLAIM 81 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 81 The combination of claim 77, where said mixed copper oxide 
composition has a non-stoichiometric amount of oxygen therein. 



Volume 3 



Page 95 of 575 



CLAIM 82 is withdrawn 



CLAIM 83 is withdrawn 



CLAIM 82 



CLAIM 83 



Volume 3 



Page 96 of 575 



CLAIM 84 

Claim 84 recites: 



CLAIM 84 A superconducting combination, comprising: 



a mixed transition metal oxide composition containing a non- 
stoichiometric amount of oxygen therein, a transition metal 
and at least one additional element , said composition having 
substantially zero resistance to the flow of electricity 
therethrough when cooled to a superconducting state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, said mixed 
transition metal oxide has a superconducting onset 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, and 



a current source for passing an electrical superconducting 
current through said composition when said composition is in 
said superconducting state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, and less than said superconducting onset 
temperature. 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 



Volume 3 



Page 97 of 575 




Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 98 of 575 




CLAIM 85 

Claim 85 recites: 

CLAIM 85 The combination of claim 84, where said transition 
metal is copper . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 99 of 575 




CLAIM 86 

CLAIM 86 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 86 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition including a transition metal, a rare earth or 
rare earth-like element, an alkaline earth element, and 
oxygen, where said composition is a mixed transition metal 
oxide having a non-stoichiometric amount of oxygen therein 
and exhibiting a superconducting onset temperature greater 
than or equal to 26°K, 

a temperature controller for maintaining said composition to 
said superconducting state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and less than said superconducting onset 
temperature, and 

a current source for passing an electrical current through 
said composition while said composition is in said 
superconducting state. 



Volume 3 



Page 100 of 575 



CLAIM 87 

Claim 87 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 87 The apparatus of claim 86, where said transition 
metal is copper. 



Volume 3 



Page 101 of 575 



# 



CLAIM 88 

Claim 88 recites: 

CLAIM 88 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition exhibiting a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K . 

a cooler for cooling said composition to a temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K at which temperature said 
composition exhibits said superconductive state, and 

a current source for passing an electrical current through 
said composition while said composition is in said 
superconductive state. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 102 of 575 



CLAIM 89 

Claim 89 recites: 

CLAIM 89 The apparatus of claim 88, where said 
composition is comprised of a metal oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 103 of 575 



CLAIM 90 

Claim 90 recites: 

CLAIM 90 The apparatus of claim 88, where said 
composition is comprised of a transition metal oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 104 of 575 



# 



CLAIM 91 

Claim 91 recites: 

CLAIM 91 A combination, comprising: 

a composition exhibiting the onset of a DC substantially zero 
resistance state at an onset temperature in excess of 30°K . 
and 

a current source for passing an electrical current through 
said composition while it is in said substantially zero 
resistance state. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 105 of 575 



CLAIM 92 



Claim 92 recites: 

CLAIM 92 The combination of claim 91 , where said 
composition is a copper oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 106 of 575 



CLAIM 93 



CLAIM 93 recites: 

CLAIM 93 An apparatus, comprising: 

a mixed copper oxide material exhibiting an onset of 
superconductivity at an onset temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, and 

a current source for producing an electrical current through 
said copper oxide material while it is in a superconducting 
state at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 107 of 575 



CLAIM 94 



Claim 94 recites: 

CLAIM 94 The apparatus of claim 93, where said copper 
oxide material exhibits a laver-like crystalline structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 108 of 575 




CLAIM 95 

Claim 95 recites: 

CLAIM 95 The apparatus of claim 93, where said 
copper oxide material exhibits a mixed valence state . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 109 of 575 



CLAIM 96 



Claim 96 recites: 

CLAIM 96 A superconductive apparatus for causing electric- 
current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition comprising a 
copper-oxide compound having a laver-tvpe perovskite-like 
crystal structure , the composition having a superconductor 
transition temperature Tc of greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition 
temperature Tc of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source for causing an electric current to flow in 
the superconductor element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 



Volume 3 



Page 110 of 575 



Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 1 1 1 of 575 





CLAIM 97 



Claim 97 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 97 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 96 in which the copper-oxide compound of the 
superconductive composition includes at least one rare-earth 
or rare-earth-like element and at least one alkaline-earth 
element. 



CLAIM 98 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 97 in which the rare-earth or rare-earth-like element is 
lanthanum. 



CLAIM 99 The superconductive apparatus according 
to claim 97 in which the alkaline-earth element is 
barium. 



CLAIM 98 



Claim 98 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 99 



Claim 99 which is allowed recites: 



Volume 3 



Page 112 of 575 



CLAIM 100 



Claim 1 00 recites: 

CLAIM 100 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 96 in which the copper-oxide compound of the 
superconductive composition includes mixed valent copper 
ions . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 113 of 575 



CLAIM 101 

Claim 101 recites: 

CLAIM 101 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 100 in which the copper-oxide compound includes at 
least one element in a nonstoichiometric atomic proportion . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 114 of 575 




CLAIM 102 

Claim 102 recites: 

CLAIM 102 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 101 in which oxygen is present in the copper-oxide 
compound in a nonstoichiometric atomic proportion . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 115 of 575 




CLAIM 103 

Claim 103 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 103 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
having a layer-type perovskite-like crystal structure, the copper-oxide compound 
including at least one rare-earth or rare-earth-like element and at least one 
alkaline-earth element, the composition having a superconductive/resistive 
transition defining a superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset temperature Tc and a lower 
limit defined by an effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tq=o, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tq=o 
of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source for causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 



Volume 3 



Page 116 of 575 



# 



CLAIM 104 

Claim 104 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 104 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 103 in which the rare-earth or rare-earth-like element 
is lanthanum. 

CLAIM 105 

Claim 1 05 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 105 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 103 in which the alkaline-earth element is barium. 

CLAIM 106 

Claim 1 06 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 106 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 103 in which the copper-oxide compound of the 
superconductive composition includes mixed valent copper 
ions. 



Volume 3 



Page 117 of 575 




CLAIM 107 

Claim 1 07 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 107 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 106 in which the copper-oxide compound includes at 
least one element in a nonstoichiometric atomic proportion. 

CLAIM 108 

Claim 108 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 108 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 107 in which oxygen is present in the copper-oxide 
compound in a nonstoichiometric atomic proportion. 



Volume 3 



Page 118 of 575 



CLAIM 109 



Claim 109 recites: 

CLAIM 109 A superconductive apparatus comprising a 
composition having a transition temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, the composition including a rare earth or 
alkaline earth element, a transition metal element capable of 
exhibiting multivalent states and oxygen, including at least 
one phase that exhibits superconductivity at temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, a temperature controller for 
maintaining said composition at said temperature to exhibit 
said superconductivity anda current source for passing an 
electrical superconducting current through said composition 
while exhibiting said superconductivity. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 119 of 575 




CLAIM 110 

Claim 1 1 0 recites: 

CLAIM 110 The combination of claim 15, where said 
additional element is rare earth or alkaline earth element 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 120 of 575 



CLAIM 111 



Claim 1 1 1 recites: 

CLAIM 111 A device comprising a superconducting 
transition metal oxide having a superconductive onset 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, said 
superconducting transition metal oxide being at a 
temperature less than said superconducting onset 
temperature and having a superconducting current flowing 
therein. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 121 of 575 



CLAIM 112 

Claim 112 recites: 

CLAIM 1 12 A device comprising a superconducting 
copper oxide having a superconductive onset 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, said 
superconducting copper oxide being at a temperature 
less than said superconducting onset temperature 
and having a superconducting current flowing therein. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 122 of 575 




CLAIM 113 



Claim 1 13 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 113 A device comprising a superconducting oxide 
composition having a superconductive onset temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, said superconducting copper 
oxide being at a temperature less than said superconducting 
onset temperature and having a superconducting current 
flowing therein, said composition comprising at least one 
each of rare earth, an alkaline earth, and copper. 



CLAIM 1 14 A device comprising a superconducting oxide 
composition having a superconductive onset temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, said superconducting copper 
oxide being at a temperature less than said superconducting 
onset temperature and having a superconducting current 
flowing therein, said composition comprising at least one 
each of a group 1MB element, an alkaline earth, and copper. 



CLAIM 114 



Claim 1 14 which is allowed recites: 



Volume 3 



Page 123 of 575 




CLAIM 115 

Claim 115 recites: 

CLAIM 1 15 A device comprising a transition metal oxide 
having a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a 
superconducting current said transition metal oxide is 
maintained at a temperature less than said Tc. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 124 of 575 




CLAIM 116 



Claim 1 1 6 recites: 



CLAIM 1 16 An apparatus comprising a transition metal 
oxide having a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a 
superconducting current said transition metal oxide is 
maintained at a temperature less than said Tc. 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 125 of 575 




CLAIM 117 



Claim 117 recites: 



CLAIM 1 17 A structure comprising a transition metal oxide 
having a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a 
superconducting current. 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 126 of 575 




CLAIM 118 

Claim 118 recites: 

CLAIM 1 18 An apparatus comprising a transition metal 
oxide having a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a 
superconducting current. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 127 of 575 




CLAIM 119 

Claim 119 recites: 

CLAIM 1 19 A device comprising a copper oxide having a Tc 
greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a superconducting 
current said copper oxide is maintained at a temperature 
less than said Tc. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 128 of 575 



CLAIM 120 



Claim 1 20 recites: 

CLAIM 120 An apparatus comprising a copper oxide having 
a Tc greater than or eoual to 26°K carrying a 
superconducting current said copper oxide is maintained at a 
temperature less than said Tc. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 129 of 575 




CLAIM 121 

Claim 1 21 recites: 

CLAIM 1 21 A device comprising a copper oxide having a Tc 
greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a superconducting 
current. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 130 of 575 




CLAIM 122 

Claim 122 recites: 

CLAIM 122 An apparatus comprising a copper oxide having 
a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a 
superconducting current. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 131 of 575 




CLAIM 123 

Claim 123 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 123 A superconductive apparatus comprising: 

a composition of the formula BaxLax-5Cu50Y wherein x is 
from about 0.75 to about 1 and y is the oxygen deficiency 
resulting from annealing said composition at temperatures 
from about 540oC to about 950oC and for times of about 15 
minutes to about 12 hours, said composition having a metal 
oxide phase which exhibits a superconducting state at a 
critical temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller for maintaining the temperature of 
said composition at a temperature less than 
said critical temperature to induce said superconducting 
state in said metal oxide phase; and 

a current source for passing an electrical current through 
said composition while said metal oxide phase is in said 
superconducting state. 

CLAIM 124 

Claim 1 24 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 124 A device comprising a composition of matter 
having a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a 
superconducting current, said composition comprising at 



Volume 3 



Page 132 of 575 





least one each of a 1MB element, an alkaline earth, and 
copper oxide said device is maintained at a temperature less 
than said Tc. 



CLAIM 125 An apparatus comprising a composition of 
matter having a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a 
superconducting current, said composition comprising at 
least one each of a rare earth, an alkaline earth, and copper 
oxide. 



CLAIM 125 



Claim 125 which is allowed recites: 



Volume 3 



Page 133 of 575 




CLAIM 126 

Claim 1 26 recites: 

CLAIM 126 A device comprising a composition of matter 
having a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a 
superconducting current, said composition comprising at 
least one each of a rare earth, and copper oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 134 of 575 



CLAIM 127 



Claim 127 recites: 

CLAIM 127 A device comprising a composition of matter 
having a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a 
superconducting current, said composition comprising at 
least one each of a NIB element and copper oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 135 of 575 




CLAIM 128 

Claim 128 recites: 

CLAIM 128 A transition metal oxide device comprising a Tc 
greater than or equal to 26°K and carrying a 
superconducting current. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 136 of 575 




CLAIM 129 

Claim 129 recites: 

CLAIM 1 29 A copper oxide device comprising a TC greater 
than or equal to 26°K and carrying a superconducting 
current. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 137 of 575 




CLAIM 130 

Claim 130 recites: 

CLAIM 130 A superconductive apparatus comprising a 
composition having a transition temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, the composition including a rare earth or 
Group III B element, a transition metal element capable of 
exhibiting multivalent states and oxygen, including at least 
one phase that exhibits superconductivity at temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, a temperature controller for 
maintaining said composition at said temperature to exhibit 
said superconductivity and a current source for passing an 
electrical superconducting current through said composition 
which exhibiting said superconductivity. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 138 of 575 



CLAIM 131 



Claim 1 31 recites: 

CLAIM 1 31 The combination of claim 1 5, where said 
additional element is a rare earth or Group III B element . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 139 of 575 



CLAIM 132 



Claim 132 recites: 

CLAIM 132 The combination of claim 12, where said 
composition includes a substantially perovskite 
superconducting phase . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants 1 evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 140 of 575 



CLAIM 134 



Claim 134 recites: 

CLAIM 133 The superconducting apparatus of claim 27, 
where said substituted Cu-oxide includes a rare earth or 
Group III B element . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 141 of 575 



CLAIM 134 
Claim 1 34 recites: 



CLAIM 134 The combination of claim 71 , where said mixed 
copper oxide further includes a rare earth or Group III B 
element. 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 142 of 575 




CLAIM 135 



Claim 135 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 135 A combination, comprising: 

a mixed copper oxide composition including an alkaline earth 
element (AE) and a rare earth or Group III B element (RE), 
said composition having a substantially layered crystalline 
structure and multi-valent oxidation states, said composition 
exhibiting a substantially zero resistance to the flow of 
electrical current therethrough when in a superconducting 
state at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, said 
mixed copper oxide having a superconducting onset 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and, 

a current source for passing an electrical superconducting 
current through said composition when said composition 
exhibits substantially zero resistance at a temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K and less than said onset 
temperature. 



CLAIM 1 36 The combination of claim 77, where said 
crystalline structure is substantially perovskite. 



CLAIM 136 



Claim 1 36 which is allowed recites: 



Volume 3 



Page 143 of 575 





CLAIM 137 



Claim 1 37 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 137 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition including a transition metal, a rare earth or 
Group III B element, an alkaline earth element, and oxygen, 
where said composition is a mixed transition metal oxide 
having a non-stoichimetric amount of oxygen therein and 
exhibiting a superconducting state at a temperature greater 
than or equal to 26°K, 

a temperature controller for maintaining said composition in 
said superconducting state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, and less than said superconducting onset 
temperature, and 

a current source for passing an electrical current through 
said composition while said composition is in said 
superconducting state. 



CLAIM 138 The apparatus of claim 93, where said copper 
oxide material exhibits a substantially layered crystalline 
structure. 



CLAIM 138 



Claim 1 38 which is allowed recites: 



Volume 3 



Page 144 of 575 



CLAIM 139 

Claim 139 recites: 

CLAIM 139 A superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a cooper-oxide compound having a 
substantially layered oerovskite crystal structure , the 
composition having a superconductor transition temperature 
Tc of greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition 
temperature Tc of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source for causing an electric current to flow in 
the superconductor element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 



Volume 3 



Page 145 of 575 



Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 146 of 575 




CLAIM 140 

Claim 140 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 140 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound having a 
substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the copper- 
oxide compound including at least one rare-earth or Group 
III B element and at least one alkaline-earth element, the 
composition having a superconductive/resistive transition 
defining a superconductive/resistive-transition temperature 
range between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tr=o, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk- resistivity intercept temperature Tr=o of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source for causing an electric current to flow in 
the superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 147 of 575 



CLAIM 141 

Claim 141 recites: 

CLAIM 141 An apparatus comprising a transition metal 
oxide having a phase therein which exhibits a 
superconducting state at a critical temperature greater than 
or equal to 26°K, 

a temperature controller maintaining the temperature of said 
material at a temperature less than said critical temperature 
to produce said superconducting state in said phase, and 

a current source passing an electrical supercurrent through 
said transition metal oxide while it is in said superconducting 
state. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants 1 evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 148 of 575 




CLAIM 142 

Claim 142 recites: 

CLAIM 142 The apparatus of claim 141 , where said 
transition metal oxide is comprised of a transition metal 
capable of exhibiting multivalent states . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants 1 teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 149 of 575 



CLAIM 143 



Claim 143 recites: 

CLAIM 143 The apparatus of claim 141, where said 
transition metal oxide is comprised of a Cu oxide. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 150 of 575 





CLAIM 144 



Claim 144 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 144 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition including a transition metal, a rare earth or 
rare earth-like element, an alkaline earth element, and 
oxygen, where said composition is a mixed transition metal 
oxide having a non-stoichiometric amount of oxygen therein 
and exhibiting a superconducting state at a temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, 

a temperature controller maintaining said composition in said 
superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K, and 

a current source passing an electrical current through said 
composition while said composition is in said 
superconducting state. 



CLAIM 145 The apparatus of claim 144, where said 
transition metal is copper. 



CLAIM 145 



Claim 145 which is allowed recites: 



Volume 3 



Page 151 of 575 



CLAIM 146 

Claim 146 recites: 

CLAIM 146 An apparatus: 

a composition exhibiting a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K . 

a temperature controller maintaining said composition at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K at which 
temperature said composition exhibits said superconductive 
state, and 

a current source passing an electrical current through said 
composition while said composition is in said 
superconductive state. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 



Volume 3 



Page 152 of 675 



Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 153 of 575 



t 



CLAIM 147 

Claim 147 recites: 

CLAIM 147 The apparatus of claim 146, where said 
composition is comprised of a metal oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 154 of 575 



CLAIM 148 



Claim 148 recites: 

CLAIM 148 The apparatus of claim 146, where said 
composition is comprised of a transition metal oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 155 of 575 



CLAIM 149 

Claim 1 49 recites: 

CLAIM 149 A superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric current flow in a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition , the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound having a laver-tvoe 
perovskite-like crystal structure , the composition having a 
superconductor transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and 
below the superconductor transition temperature Tc of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 



Volume 3 



Page 156 of 575 



Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 157 of 575 





CLAIM 150 



Claim 150 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 150 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 149 in which the copper-oxide compound of the 
superconductive composition includes at least one rare-earth 
or rare-earth-like element and at least one alkaline-earth 
element. 



CLAIM 151 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 150 in which the rare-earth or rare-earth-like element 
is lanthanum. 



CLAIM 152 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 150 in which the alkaline-earth element is barium. 



CLAIM 151 



Claim 151 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 152 



Claim 152 which is allowed recites: 



Volume 3 



Page 158 of 575 



CLAIM 153 



Claim 153 recites: 

CLAIM 153 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 149 in which the copper-oxide compound of the 
superconductive composition includes mixed valent copper 
ions . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 159 of 575 




CLAIM 154 

Claim 1 54 recites: 

CLAIM 154 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 153 in which the copper-oxide compound includes at 
least one element in a nonstoichiometric atomic proportion . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 160 of 575 




CLAIM 155 

Claim 155 recites: 

CLAIM 155 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 154 in which oxygen is present in the copper-oxide 
compound in a nonstoichiometric atomic proportion . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 161 of 575 




CLAIM 156 



Claim 156 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 156 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound having a layer-type 
perovskite-like crystal structure, the copper-oxide compound 
including at least one rare-earth or rare-earth-like element 
and at least one alkaline-earth element, the composition 
having a superconductive/resistive-transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 , the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature below the effectively-zero-bu Ik- 
resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 162 of 575 




CLAIM 157 

Claim 157 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 157 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 156 in which the rare-earth or rare-earth-like element 
is lanthanum. 

CLAIM 158 

Claim 158 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 158 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 156 in which the alkaline-earth element is barium. 

CLAIM 159 

Claim 159 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 159 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 156 in which the copper-oxide compound of the 
superconductive composition includes mixed valent copper 
ions. 



Volume 3 



Page 163 of 575 




CLAIM 160 

Claim 160 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 160 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 159 in which the copper-oxide compound includes at 
least one element in a nonstoichiometric atomic proportion. 

CLAIM 161 

Claim 161 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 161 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 160 in which oxygen is present in the copper-oxide 
compound in a nonstoichiometric atomic proportion. 



Volume 3 



Page 164 of 575 



CLAIM 162 

Claim 162 recites: 

CLAIM 162 An apparatus comprising copper oxide having a 
phase therein which exhibits a superconducting state at a 
critical temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller maintaining the temperature of said 
material at a temperature less than said critical temperature 
to produce said superconducting state in said phase; 

a current source passing an electrical supercurrent through 
said copper oxide while it is in said superconducting state; 

said copper oxide includes at least one element selected 
from the group consisting of a Group II A element, a rare 
earth element and a Group III B element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 



Volume 3 



Page 165 of 575 



Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 166 of 575 



CLAIM 163 

Claim 163 recites: 

CLAIM 163 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition comprising copper, oxygen and any element 
selected from the group consisting of a Group II A element, a 
rare earth element and a Group III B element, where said 
composition is a mixed copper oxide having a non- 
stoichiometric amount of oxygen therein and exhibiting a 
superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

a temperature controller maintaining said composition in said 
superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K; and 

a current source passing an electrical current through said 
composition while said composition is in said 
superconducting state. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 



Volume 3 



Page 167 of 575 



Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 168 of 575 



CLAIM 164 



Claim 1 64 recites: 

CLAIM 164 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition exhibiting a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller maintaining said composition at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K at which 
temperature said composition exhibits said superconductive 
state; 

a current source passing an electrical current through said 
composition while said composition is in said 
superconductive state; and 

said composition including a copper oxide and an element 
selected from the group consisting of Group II A element, a 
rare earth element and a Group III B element . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 



Volume 3 



Page 169 of 575 



Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 170 of 575 



CLAIM 165 



Claim 1 65 recites: 

CLAIM 165 An apparatus for causing electric-current flow in 
a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound having a laver-tvpe 
perovskite-like crystal structure, the composition having a 
superconductive transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K, said superconductive composition includes at 
least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
Group II A element, a rare earth element: and a Group III B 
element : 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and 
below the superconductor transition temperature Tc of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 



Volume 3 



Page 171 of 575 




shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 172 of 575 




CLAIM 166 

Claim 1 66 recites: 

CLAIM 166 An apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound having a laver-tvpe 
perovskite-like crystal structure, the copper-oxide compound 
including at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a Group II A element, a rare earth element and 
a Group III B element the composition having a 
superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- 
resistivity intercept temperature Tp=o of the superconductive 
composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 173 of 575 




The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 174 of 575 





CLAIM 167 



Claim 167 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 167 An apparatus comprising: 

a copper oxide having a phase therein which exhibits a 
superconducting state at a critical temperature greater than 
or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller maintaining the temperature of said 
material at a temperature less than said critical temperature 
to produce said superconducting state in said phase; 

a current source passing an electrical supercurrent through 
said copper oxide while it is in said superconducting state; 

said copper oxide includes an element selected from the 
group consisting of a Group II A element and at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of a rare earth 
element and a Group III B element. 



CLAIM 168 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition including copper, oxygen and an element 
selected from the group consisting of at least one Group II A 



CLAIM 168 



Claim 168 which is allowed recites: 



Volume 3 



Page 175 of 575 




element and at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a rare earth element and a Group III B element, 
where said composition is a mixed copper oxide having a 
non-stoichiometric amount of oxygen therein and exhibiting a 
superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

a temperature controller maintaining said composition in said 
superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K; and 

a current source passing an electrical current through said 
composition while said composition is in said 
superconducting state. 



CLAIM 169 

Claim 169 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 169 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition exhibiting a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller maintaining said composition at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K at which 
temperature said composition exhibits said superconductive 
state; 



Volume 3 



Page 176 of 575 



a current source passing an electrical current through said 
composition while said composition is in said 
superconductive state; and 

said composition including a copper oxide and at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of Group II A and 
at least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
rare earth element and a Group III B element. 

CLAIM 170 

Claim 170 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 1 70 A superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound having a layer-type 
perovskite-like crystal structure, the composition having a 
superconductive transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K, said superconductive composition includes at 
least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
Group II A element and at least one element selected from 
the group consisting of a rare earth element and a Group III 
B element; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and 



Volume 3 



Page 177 of 575 




below the superconductor transition temperature Tc of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

CLAIM 171 

Claim 171 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 171 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound having a layer-type 
perovskite-like crystal structure, the copper-oxide compound 
including at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a Group II A element and at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a rare earth element 
and a Group III B element, the composition having a 
superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive-resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 , the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 



Volume 3 



Page 178 of 575 




(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- 
resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of the superconductive 
composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



CLAIM 172 

Claim 172 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 172 An apparatus comprising: 

a transition metal oxide having a phase therein which 
exhibits a superconducting state at a critical temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller maintaining the temperature of said 
material at a temperature less than said critical temperature 
to produce said superconducting state in said phase; 

a current source passing an electrical supercurrent through 
said copper oxide while it is in said superconducting state; 

said transitional metal oxide includes at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a Group II A element 
and at least one element selected from the group consisting 
of a rare earth element and a Group III B element. 



Volume 3 



Page 179 of 575 



CLAIM 173 



Claim 173 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 173 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition including a transition metal, oxygen and an 
element selected from the group consisting of a Group II A 
element and at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a rare earth element and a Group 1MB element, 
where said composition is a mixed transitional metal oxide 
formed from said transition metal and said oxygen, said 
mixed transition metal oxide having a non-stoichiometric 
amount of oxygen therein and exhibiting a superconducting 
state at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller maintaining said composition in said 
superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K; and 

a current source passing an electrical current through said 
composition while said composition is in said 
superconducting state. 

CLAIM 174 

Claim 174 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 174 An apparatus: 



Volume 3 



Page 1 80 of 575 



forming a composition exhibiting a superconductive state at 
a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller maintaining said composition at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K at which 
temperature said composition exhibits said superconductive 
state; 

a current source passing an electrical current through said 
composition while said composition is in said 
superconductive state; and 

said composition including a transitional metal oxide and at 
least one element selected from the group consisting of 
Group II A element and at least one element selected from 
the group consisting of a rare earth element and a Group III 
B element. 

CLAIM 175 

Claim 175 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 1 75 A superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a transition metal oxide compound having a 
layer-type perovskite-like crystal structure, the composition 
having a superconductive transition temperature Tc of 



Volume 3 



Page 181 of 575 




greater than or equal to 26°K, said superconductive 
composition includes an element selected from the group 
consisting of a Group II A element and at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a rare earth element 
and a Group III B element; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and 
below the superconductor transition Tc of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



CLAIM 176 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a transition metal-oxide compound having a 
layer-type perovskite-like crystal structure, the transition 
metal-oxide compound including at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a Group II A element 
and at least one element selected from the group consisting 
of a rare earth element and a Group III B element, the 



CLAIM 176 



Claim 176 which is allowed recites: 



Volume 3 



Page 182 of 575 



composition having a superconductive/resistive transition 
defining a superconductive/resistive-transition temperature 
range between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- 
resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of the superconductive 
composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

CLAIM 177 

Claim 1 77 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 177 An apparatus comprising: 

a copper oxide having a phase therein which exhibits a 
superconducting state at a critical temperature greater than 
or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller maintaining the temperature of said 
material at a temperature less than said critical temperature 
to produce said superconducting state in said phase; 



Volume 3 



Page 183 of 575 




a current source passing an electrical supercurrent through 
said copper oxide while it is in said superconducting state; 

said copper oxide includes at least one Group II A element, 
and at least one element selected from the group consisting 
of a rare earth element and a Group III B element. 

CLAIM 178 

Claim 1 78 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 178 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition including copper, oxygen, a Group II A 
element and at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a rare earth element and a Group III B element, 
where said composition is a mixed copper oxide having a 
non-stoichiometric amount of oxygen therein and exhibiting a 
superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

a temperature controller maintaining said composition in said 
superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K; and 

a current source passing an electrical current through said 
composition while said composition is in said 
superconducting state. 



Volume 3 



Page 184 of 575 




CLAIM 179 

CLAIM 179 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 179 A structure comprising: 

a composition exhibiting a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller maintaining said composition at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K at which 
temperature said composition exhibits said superconductive 
state; 

a current source passing an electrical current through said 
composition while said composition is in said 
superconductive state; and 

said composition including a copper oxide, a Group II A 
element, at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a rare earth element and a Group III B element. 

CLAIM 180 

Claim 180 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 180 A superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 



Volume 3 



Page 185 of 575 




(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound having a layer-type 
perovskite-like crystal structure, the composition having a 
superconductive transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K, said superconductive composition includes a 
Group II A element, and at least one element selected from 
the group consisting of a rare earth element and a Group III 
B element; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and 
below the superconductor transition temperature Tc of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

CLAIM 181 

Claim 181 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 181 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound having a layer-type 
perovskite-like crystal structure, the copper-oxide compound 



Volume 3 



Page 186 of 575 




including Group II A element, and at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a rare earth element 
and a Group III B element, the composition having a 
superconductive-resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- 
resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of the superconductive 
composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 187 of 575 



CLAIM 182 



Claim 182 recites: 

CLAIM 182 An apparatus comprising a composition having 
a transition temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, the 
composition including a rare earth or alkaline earth element, 
a transition metal element capable of exhibiting multivalent 
states and oxygen, including at least one phase that exhibits 
superconductivity at temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K, a temperature controller maintaining said composition 
at said temperature to exhibit said superconductivity and a 
current source passing an electrical superconducting current 
through said composition with said phrase exhibiting said 
superconductivity. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 188 of 575 




CLAIM 183 

Claim 183 recites: 

CLAIM 183 An apparatus comprising a superconducting 
transition metal oxide having a superconductive onset 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, a temperature 
controller maintaining said superconducting transition metal 
oxide at a temperature less than said superconducting onset 
temperature and a current source flowing a superconducting 
current therein. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 189 of 575 




CLAIM 184 

Claim 1 84 recites: 

CLAIM 184 An apparatus comprising a superconducting 
copper oxide having a superconductive onset temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, a temperature controller 
maintaining said superconducting copper oxide at a 
temperature less than said superconducting onset 
temperature and a current source flowing a superconducting 
current in said superconducting oxide. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 190 of 575 





CLAIM 185 



Claim 185 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 185 An apparatus comprising a superconducting 
oxide composition having a superconductive onset 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, a temperature 
controller maintaining said superconducting copper oxide at 
a temperature less than said superconducting onset 
temperature and a current source flowing a superconducting 
current therein, said composition comprising at least one 
each of rare earth, an alkaline earth, and copper. 



CLAIM 186 An apparatus comprising a superconducting 
oxide composition having a superconductive onset 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, a temperature 
controller maintaining said superconducting copper oxide at 
a temperature less than said superconducting onset 
temperature and a current source flowing a superconducting 
electrical current therein, said composition comprising at 
least one each of a Group NIB element, an alkaline earth, 
and copper. 



CLAIM 186 



Claim 1 86 which is allowed recites: 



Volume 3 



Page 191 of 575 



CLAIM 187 



Claim 1 87 recites: 

CLAIM 187 An apparatus comprising a superconducting 
electrical current in a transition metal oxide having a Tc 
greater than or equal to 26°K and maintaining said transition 
metal oxide at a temperature less than said Tc. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 192 of 575 



CLAIM 188 



Claim 1 88 recites: 

CLAIM 188 An apparatus comprising a current source 
flowing a superconducting current in a copper oxide having a 
Tc greater than or equal to 26°K and a temperature 
controller maintaining said copper oxide at a temperature 
less than said Tc. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants 1 evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 193 of 575 




CLAIM 189 

Claim 189 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 189 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition of the formula BaLa5-xCu505(3-y), wherein x 
is from about 0.75 to about 1 and y is the oxygen deficiency 
resulting from annealing said composition at temperatures 
from about 540oC to about 950oC and for times of about 1 5 
minutes to about 12 hours, said composition having a metal 
oxide phase which exhibits a superconducting state at a 
critical temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller maintaining the temperature of said 
composition at a temperature less than said critical 
temperature to induce said superconducting state in said 
metal oxide phase; and 

a current source passing an electrical current through said 
composition while said metal oxide phase is in said 
superconducting state. 

CLAIM 190 

Claim 1 90 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 190 An apparatus comprising a current source 
flowing a superconducting electrical current in a composition 
of matter having a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K, said 
composition comprising at least one each of a Group III B 



Volume 3 



Page 194 of 575 




element, an alkaline earth, and copper oxide and a 
temperature controller maintaining said composition of 
matter at a temperature less than Tc. 

CLAIM 191 

CLAIM 191 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 191 An apparatus comprising a current source 
flowing a superconducting electrical current in a composition 
of matter having a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K, said 
composition comprising at least one each of a rare earth, 
alkaline earth, and copper oxide and a temperature 
controller maintaining said composition of matter at a 
temperature less than said Tc. 



Volume 3 



Page 195 of 575 



CLAIM 192 



Claim 1 92 recites: 

CLAIM 192 An apparatus comprising a current source flowing a 
superconducting electrical current in a composition of matter having 
a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K, said composition comprising at 
least one each of a rare earth, and copper oxide and a temperature 
controller maintaining said composition of matter at a temperature 
less than said Tc. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 196 of 575 



CLAIM 193 



Claim 193 recites: 

CLAIM 193 An apparatus comprising a current source 
flowing a superconducting electrical current in a composition 
of matter having a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K carrying, 
said composition comprising at least one each of a Group III 
B element, and copper oxide and a temperature controller 
maintaining said composition of matter at a temperature less 
than said Tc. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 197 of 575 



CLAIM 194 



Claim 194 recites: 

CLAIM 194 An apparatus comprising a current source 
flowing a superconducting electrical current in a transition 
metal oxide comprising a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K 
and a temperature controller maintaining said transition 
metal oxide at a temperature less than said Tc. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants 1 teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 198 of 575 



CLAIM 195 



Claim 1 95 recites: 

CLAIM 195 An apparatus comprising a current source 
flowing a superconducting electrical current in a copper 
oxide composition of matter comprising a Tc greater than or 
equal to 26°K and a temperature controller maintaining said 
copper oxide composition of matter at a temperature less 
than said Tc. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 199 of 575 




CLAIM 196 

Claim 196 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 196 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition including a transition metal, a Group III B 
element, an alkaline earth element, and oxygen, where said 
composition is a mixed transition metal oxide having a non- 
stoichiometric amount of oxygen therein and exhibiting a 
superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K, 

a temperature controller maintaining said composition in said 
superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K, and 

a current source passing an electrical current through said 
composition while said composition is in said 
superconducting state. 

CLAIM 197 

Claim 197 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 197 The apparatus of claim 196, where said 
transition metal is copper. 



Volume 3 



Page 200 of 575 



CLAIM 198 

Claim 1 98 recites: 

CLAIM 198 A superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric current flow in a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound having a 
substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the 
composition having a superconductor transition temperature 
Tc of greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and 
below the superconductor transition temperature Tc of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 



Volume 3 



Page 201 of 575 



Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 202 of 575 




CLAIM 199 

Claim 199 recites: 

CLAIM 199 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 198 in which the copper-oxide compound of the 
superconductive composition includes at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a rare-earth element, a 
Group III B element and an alkaline-earth element . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 203 of 575 



CLAIM 200 



Claim 200 recites: 

CLAIM 200 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 199 in which the rare-earth is lanthanum . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 204 of 575 




CLAIM 201 

Claim 201 recites: 

CLAIM 201 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 199 in which the alkaline-earth element is barium . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 205 of 575 




CLAIM 201 

Claim 202 recites: 

CLAIM 202 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 198 in which the copper-oxide compound of the 
superconductive composition includes mixed valent copper 
ions . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 206 of 575 



CLAIM 203 

Claim 203 recites: 

CLAIM 203 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 202 in which the copper-oxide compound includes at 
least one element in a nonstoichiometric atomic proportion . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 207 of 575 



CLAIM 204 



Claim 204 recites: 

CLAIM 204 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 203 in which oxygen is present in the copper-oxide 
compound in a nonstoichiometric atomic proportion . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 208 of 575 




CLAIM 205 



Claim 205 recites: 



CLAIM 205 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound having a 
substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the copper- 
oxide compound including at least one element selected 
from the group consisting of a rare-earth element, a Group III 
B element and an alkaline-earth element , the composition 
having a superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- 
resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 209 of 575 




The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 210 of 575 



CLAIM 206 



Claim 206 recites: 

CLAIM 206 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 205 in which said at least one element is lanthanum . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 211 of 575 




CLAIM 207 

Claim 207 recites: 

CLAIM 207 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 205 in which the alkaline-earth element is barium . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 212 of 575 




CLAIM 208 

Claim 208 recites: 

CLAIM 208 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 205 in which the copper-oxide compound of the 
superconductive composition includes mixed valent copper 
ions . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 213 of 575 




CLAIM 209 

Claim 209 recites: 

CLAIM 209 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 208 in which the copper-oxide compound includes at 
least one element in a nonstoichiometric atomic proportion . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 214 of 575 




CLAIM 210 

Claim 210 recites: 

CLAIM 210 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 209 in which oxygen is present in the copper-oxide 
compound in a nonstoichiometric atomic proportion . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 215 of 575 




CLAIM 211 

Claim 211 recites: 

CLAIM 21 1 A superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound having a 
substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the 
composition having a superconductive transition temperature 
Tc of greater than or eoual to 26°K . said superconductive 
composition includes at least one element selected from the 
group consisting of a Group II A element, a rare earth 
element; and a Group III B element; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and 
below the superconductor transition temperature Tc of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 



Volume 3 



Page 216 of 575 




shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 217 of 575 




CLAIM 212 

Claim 212 recites: 

CLAIM 212 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound having a 
substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the copper- 
oxide compound including at least one element selected 
from the group consisting of a Group II A element, a rare 
earth element and a Group III B element , the composition 
having a superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- 
resistivity intercept temperature Tp=o of the superconductive 
composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 218 of 575 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 219 of 575 



CLAIM 213 

Claim 213 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 213 A superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound having a 
substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the 
composition having a superconductive transition temperature 
Tc of greater than or equal to 26°K, said superconductive 
composition includes a Group II A element and at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of a rare earth 
element and a Group III B element; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and 
below the superconductor transition temperature Tc of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 220 of 575 



• 



CLAIM 214 

Claim 214 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 214 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive composition, the 
superconductive composition consisting essentially of a copper-oxide compound 
having a substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the copper-oxide 
compound including a Group II A element and at least one element selected from 
the group consisting of a rare earth element and a Group III B element, the 
composition having a superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive-resistive-transition temperature range between an upper limit 
defined by a transition-onset temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the transition-onset 
temperature Tc being greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor element at a 
temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 
of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 



Volume 3 



Page 221 of 575 




CLAIM 215 



Claim 215 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 215 A superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a transition metal oxide compound having a 
substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the 
composition having a superconductive transition temperature 
Tc of greater than or equal to 26°K, said superconductive 
composition includes a Group II A element and at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of a rare earth 
element and a Group III B element; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and 
below the superconductor transition Tc of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 222 of 575 



CLAIM 216 



Claim 216 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 216 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a transition metal-oxide compound having a 
substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the 
transition metal-oxide compound including a Group II A 
element and at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a rare earth element and a Group 1MB element, 
the composition having a superconductive/resistive transition 
defining a superconductive/resistive-transition temperature 
range between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- 
resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of the superconductive 
composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 223 of 575 



CLAIM 217 

Claim 217 recites: 

CLAIM 217 An apparatus according to claim 182 wherein 
said composition comprises a substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 224 of 575 



CLAIM 218 



Claim 218 recites: 

CLAIM 218 An apparatus according to claim 183 wherein 
said superconducting transition metal oxide comprises a 
substantially layered perovskite crystal structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 225 of 575 



• 



CLAIM 219 

Claim 219 recites: 

CLAIM 219 An apparatus according to claim 184 wherein 
said superconducting copper oxide comprises a substantially 
layered perovskite crystal structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 226 of 575 



CLAIM 220 



Claim 220 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 220 An apparatus according to claim 185 wherein 
said superconducting oxide composition comprises a 
substantially layered perovskite crystal structure. 

CLAIM 221 

Claim 221 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 221 An apparatus according to claim 186 wherein 
said superconducting oxide composition comprises a 
substantially layered perovskite crystal structure. 



Volume 3 



Page 227 of 575 




CLAIM 222 

Claim 222 recites: 

CLAIM 222 An apparatus according to claim 187 wherein 
said transition metal oxide comprises a substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 228 of 575 



CLAIM 223 



Claim 223 recites: 

CLAIM 223 An apparatus according to claim 188 wherein 
said copper oxide comprises a substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 229 of 575 



CLAIM 224 

Claim 224 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 224 An apparatus according to claim 189 wherein 
said composition comprises a substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure. 



CLAIM 225 

Claim 225 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 225 An apparatus according to claim 190 wherein 
said composition of matter comprises a substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure. 



CLAIM 226 

Claim 226 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 226 An apparatus according to claim 191 wherein 
said composition of matter comprises substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure. 



Volume 3 



Page 230 of 575 




CLAIM 227 

CLAIM 227 recites: 

CLAIM 227 An apparatus according to claim 192 wherein 
said composition of matter comprises a substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 231 of 575 




CLAIM 228 

CLAIM 228 recites: 

CLAIM 228 An apparatus according to claim 193 wherein 
said composition of matter comprises substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 232 of 575 




CLAIM 229 

CLAIM 229 recites: 

CLAIM 229 An apparatus according to claim 194 wherein 
said transition metal oxide comprises substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 233 of 575 




CLAIM 230 

CLAIM 230 recites: 

CLAIM 230 An apparatus according to claim 195 wherein 
said copper oxide composition comprises substantially 
layered oerovskite crystal structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 234 of 575 



CLAIM 231 



Claim 231 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 231 An apparatus comprising a composition of matter having a Tc 
greater than or equal to 26°K carrying a superconducting current, said 
composition comprising at least one each of a rare earth, an alkaline earth, and 
copper oxide. 



Volume 3 



Page 235 of 575 




CLAIM 232 

CLAIM 232 recites: 

CLAIM 232 An apparatus comprising: 

a transition metal oxide comprising a phase therein which 
exhibits a superconducting state at a critical temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, 

a temperature controller for maintaining the temperature of 
said material at a temperature less than said critical 
temperature to produce said superconducting state in said 
phase, and 

a source of an electrical supercurrent through said transition 
metal oxide while it is in said superconducting state. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 



Volume 3 



Page 236 of 575 



Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 237 of 575 




CLAIM 233 

CLAIM 233 recites: 

CLAIM 233 An apparatus according to claim 232, where 
said transition metal oxide is comprised of a transition metal 
capable of exhibiting multivalent states . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 238 of 575 



CLAIM 234 



CLAIM 234 recites: 

CLAIM 234 An apparatus according to claim 232, where 
said transition metal oxide is comprised of a Cu oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 239 of 575 




CLAIM 235 



Claim 235 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 235 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition including a transition metal, a rare earth or 
rare earth-like element, an alkaline earth element, and 
oxygen, where said composition is a mixed transition metal 
oxide comprising a non-stoichiometric amount of oxygen 
therein and exhibiting a superconducting state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, 

a temperature controller for maintaining said composition in 
said superconducting state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, and 

a source of an electrical current through said composition 
while said composition is in said superconducting state. 



Volume 3 



Page 240 of 575 



CLAIM 236 

Claim 236 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 236 An apparatus according to claim 235, where 
said transition metal is copper. 



Volume 3 



Page 241 of 575 



CLAIM 237 



CLAIM 237 recites: 

CLAIM 237 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition exhibiting a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, a temperature 
controller for maintaining said composition at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K at which 
temperature said composition exhibits said superconductive 
state, and 

a source of an electrical current through said composition 
while said composition is in said superconductive state. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 242 of 575 




CLAIM 238 

CLAIM 238 recites: 

CLAIM 238 An apparatus according to claim 237, where 
said composition is comprised of a metal oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 243 of 575 




CLAIM 239 

CLAIM 239 recites: 

CLAIM 239 An apparatus according to claim 238, where 
said composition is comprised of a transition metal oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 244 of 575 



• 



CLAIM 240 

CLAIM 240 recites: 

CLAIM 240 An apparatus capable of carrying electric 
current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a laver- 
tvoe perovskite-like crystal structure, the composition 
comprising a superconductor transition temperature Tc of 
greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition 
temperature Tc of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 



Volume 3 



Page 245 of 575 




Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 246 of 575 



CLAIM 241 

Claim 241 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 241 An apparatus according to claim 240 in which 
the copper-oxide compound of the superconductive 
composition includes at least one rare-earth or rare-earth- 
like element and at least one alkaline-earth element. 

CLAIM 242 

Claim 242 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 242 An apparatus according to claim 241 in which 
the rare-earth or rare-earth-like element is lanthanum. 

CLAIM 243 

Claim 243 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 243 An apparatus according to claim 241 in which 
the alkaline-earth element is barium. 



Volume 3 



Page 247 of 575 



CLAIM 244 

CLAIM 244 recites: 

CLAIM 244 An apparatus according to claim 240 in which 
the copper-oxide compound of the superconductive 
composition includes mixed valent copper ions . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 248 of 575 



CLAIM 245 



CLAIM 245 recites: 

CLAIM 245 An apparatus according to claim 244 in which 
the copper-oxide compound includes at least one element in 
a nonstoichiometric atomic proportion . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 249 of 575 




CLAIM 246 

CLAIM 246 recites: 

CLAIM 246 An apparatus according to claim 245 in which 
oxygen is present in the copper-oxide compound in a 
nonstoichiometric atomic proportion . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 250 of 575 



CLAIM 247 



CLAIM 247 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 247 An apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a layer- 
type perovskite-like crystal structure, the copper-oxide 
compound including at least one rare-earth or rare-earth-like 
element and at least one alkaline-earth element, the 
composition comprising a superconductive/resistive 
transition defining a superconductive/resistive-transition 
temperature range between an upper limit defined by a 
transition-onset temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by 
an 

effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 , 
the transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or 
equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 251 of 575 




CLAIM 248 

Claim 248 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 248 An apparatus according to claim 247 in which 
the rare-earth or rare-earth-like element is lanthanum. 

CLAIM 249 

Claim 249 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 249 An apparatus according to claim 247 in which 
the alkaline-earth element is barium. 

CLAIM 250 

Claim 250 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 250 An apparatus according to claim 247 in which 
the copper-oxide compound of the superconductive 
composition includes mixed valent copper ions. 



f Volume 3 Page 252 of 575 



CLAIM 251 



Claim 251 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 251 An apparatus according to claim 250 in which 
the copper-oxide compound includes at least one element in 
a nonstoichiometric atomic proportion. 



CLAIM 252 

Claim 252 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 252 An apparatus according to claim 251 in which 
oxygen is present in the copper-oxide compound in a 
nonstoichiometric atomic proportion. 



Volume 3 



Page 253 of 575 





CLAIM 253 



CLAIM 253 recites: 



CLAIM 253 An apparatus comprising: 

a copper oxide comprising a phase therein which exhibits a 
superconducting state at a critical temperature greater than 
or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller for maintaining the temperature of 
said material at a temperature less than said critical 
temperature to produce said superconducting state in said 
phase; 

a source of an electrical supercurrent through said copper 
oxide while it is in said superconducting state; 

said copper oxide includes at least one element selected 
from the group consisting of a Group II A element a rare 
earth element and a Group III B element . 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 



Volume 3 



Page 254 of 575 



Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 255 of 575 




CLAIM 254 

CLAIM 254 recites: 

CLAIM 254 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition including copper, oxvaen and an element 
selected from the group consisting of a Group II A element, a 
rare earth element and a Group III B element, where said 
composition is a mixed copper oxide comprising a non- 
stoichiometric amount of oxygen therein and exhibiting a 
superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to26°K; 

a temperature controller for maintaining said composition in 
said superconducting state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K; and 

a source of an electrical current through said composition 
while said composition is in said superconducting state. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 



Volume 3 



Page 256 of 575 




Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 257 of 575 



CLAIM 255 



CLAIM 255 recites: 

CLAIM 255 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition exhibiting a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller for maintaining said composition at 
a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K at which 
temperature said composition exhibits said superconductive 
state; 

a source of an electrical current through said composition 
while said composition is in said superconductive state; and 

said composition including a copper oxide and an element 
selected from the group consisting of Group II A element, a 
rare earth element and a Group III B element . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 



Volume 3 



Page 258 of 575 




Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 259 of 575 



CLAIM 256 



CLAIM 256 recites: 

CLAIM 256 An apparatus capable of carrying an electric- 
current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a laver- 
type perovskite-like crystal structure , the composition 
comprising a superconductive transition temperature Tc of 
greater than or equal to 26°K, said superconductive 
composition includes at least one element selected from the 
group consisting of a Group II A element, a rare earth 
element: and a Group III B element : 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition 
temperature Tc of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 



Volume 3 



Page 260 of 575 



shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 261 of 575 



CLAIM 257 



CLAIM 257 recites: 

CLAIM 257 An apparatus capable of carrying an electric 
current essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a laver- 
tvpe perovskite-like crystal structure, the copper-oxide 
compound including at least one element selected from the 
group consisting of a Group II A element, a rare earth 
element and a Group III B element , the composition 
comprising a superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively* 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 262 of 575 




The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 263 of 575 




CLAIM 258 

Claim 258 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 258 An apparatus comprising: 

a copper oxide comprising a phase therein which exhibits a 
superconducting state at a critical temperature greater than 
or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller for maintaining the temperature of 
said material at a temperature less than said critical 
temperature to produce said superconducting state in said 
phase; 

a source of an electrical supercurrent through said copper 
oxide while it is in said superconducting state; 

said copper oxide includes at least one element selected 
from the group consisting of a Group II A element and at 
least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
rare earth element and a Group III B element. 



Volume 3 



Page 264 of 575 




CLAIM 259 



Claim 259 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 259 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition including copper, oxygen and an element 
selected from the group consisting of at least one Group II A 
element and at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a rare earth element and a Group III B element, 
where said composition is a mixed copper oxide comprising 
a non-stoichiometric amount of oxygen therein and exhibiting 
a superconducting state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K; 

a temperature for maintaining said composition in said 
superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K; and 

a source of an electrical current through said composition 
while said composition is in said superconducting state. 



CLAIM 260 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition exhibiting a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; 



CLAIM 260 



Claim 260 which is allowed recites: 



Volume 3 



Page 265 of 575 




a temperature for maintaining said composition at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K at which 
temperature said composition exhibits said superconductive 
state; 

a source of an electrical current through said composition 
while said composition is in said superconductive state; and 

said composition including a copper oxide and at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of Group II A and 
at least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
rare earth element and a Group III B element. 



CLAIM 261 An apparatus capable of carrying an electric- 
current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a layer- 
type perovskite-like crystal structure, the composition 
comprising a superconductive transition temperature Tc of 
greater than or equal to 26°K, said superconductive 
composition includes at least one element selected from the 
group consisting of a Group II A element and at least one 



CLAIM 261 



Claim 261 which is allowed recites: 



Volume 3 



Page 266 of 575 




element selected from the group consisting of a rare earth 
element and a Group III B element; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition 
temperature Tc of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



CLAIM 262 An apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a layer- 
type perovskite-like crystal structure, the copper-oxide 
compound including at least one element selected from the 
group consisting of a Group II A element and at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of a rare earth 
element and a Group NIB element, the composition 
comprising a superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive-resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 



CLAIM 262 



Claim 262 which is allowed recites: 



Volume 3 



Page 267 of 575 




zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



CLAIM 263 

Claim 263 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 263 An apparatus comprising: 

a transition metal oxide comprising a phase therein which 
exhibits a superconducting state at a critical temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller for maintaining the temperature of 
said material at a temperature less than said critical 
temperature to produce said superconducting state in said 
phase; 

a source of an electrical supercurrent through said transition 
metal oxide while it is in said superconducting state; 



Volume 3 



Page 268 of 575 



said transitional metal oxide includes at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a Group II A element 
and at lest one element selected from the group consisting 
of a rare earth element and a Group 1MB element. 

CLAIM 264 

Claim 264 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIMS 264 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition including a transition metal, oxygen and an 
element selected from the group consisting of at least one 
Group II A element and at least one element selected from 
the group consisting of a rare earth element and a Group III 
B element, where said composition is a mixed transitional 
metal oxide formed from said transition metal and said 
oxygen, said mixed transition metal oxide comprising a non- 
stoichiometric amount of oxygen therein and exhibiting a 
superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

a temperature controller for maintaining said composition in 
said 



Volume 3 



Page 269 of 575 




CLAIM 265 

Claim 265 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 265 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition exhibiting a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller for maintaining said composition at 
a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K at which 
temperature said composition exhibits said superconductive 
... state; „ . 



a source of an electrical current through said composition 
while said composition is in said superconductive state; and 

said composition including a transitional metal oxide and at 
least one element selected from the group consisting of 
Group II A element and at least one element selected from 
the group consisting of a rare earth element and a Group III 
B element. 



Volume 3 



Page 270 of 575 




CLAIM 266 

Claim 266 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 266 An apparatus capable of carrying an electric- 
current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a transition metal oxide compound comprising 
a layer-type perovskite-like crystal structure, the composition 
comprising a superconductive transition temperature Tc of 
greater than or equal to 26°K, said superconductive 
composition includes at least one element selected from the 
group consisting of a Group II A element and at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of a rare earth 
element and a Group III B element; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition Tc of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 271 of 575 



CLAIM 267 

Claim 267 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 267 An apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a transition metal-oxide compound comprising 
a layer-type perovskite-like crystal structure, the transition 
metal-oxide compound including at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a Group II A element 
and at least one element selected from the group consisting 
of a rare earth element and a Group III B element, the 
composition comprising a superconductive/resistive 
transition defining a superconductive/resistive-transition 
temperature range between an upper limit defined by a 
transition-onset temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by 
an effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature 
Tp=0, the transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than 
or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 272 of 575 




CLAIM 268 

CLAIM 268 recites: 

CLAIM 268 An apparatus comprising: 

a copper oxide comprising a phase therein which exhibits a 
superconducting state at a critical temperature greater than 
or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller for maintaining the temperature of 
said material at a temperature less than said critical 
temperature to produce said superconducting state in said 
phase; 

a source for an electrical supercurrent through said copper 
oxide while it is in said superconducting state; 

said copper oxide includes at least one element selected 
from group consisting of a Group II A element, at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of a rare earth 
element and at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a Group III B element . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 



Volume 3 



Page 273 of 575 



Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 274 of 575 




CLAIM 269 

Claim 269 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 269 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition including copper, oxygen and an element 
selected from the group consisting of at least one Group II A 
element and at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a rare earth element at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a Group NIB element, 
where said composition is a mixed copper oxide comprising 
a non-stoichiometric amount of oxygen therein and exhibiting 
a superconducting state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller for maintaining said composition in 
said superconducting state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K; and 

a source of an electrical current through said composition 
while said composition is in said superconducting state. 



Volume 3 



Page 275 of 575 



CLAIM 270 



Claim 270 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 270 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition exhibiting a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller for maintaining said composition at 
a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K at which 
temperature said composition exhibits said superconductive 
state; 

a source of an electrical current through said composition 
while said composition is in said superconductive state; and 

said composition including a copper oxide and at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of Group II A 
element, at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a rare earth element and at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a Group III B element. 



Volume 3 



Page 276 of 575 



CLAIM 271 



Claim 271 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 271 An apparatus for causing an electric-current 
flow in a superconductive state at a temperature greater than 
or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a layer- 
type perovskite-like crystal structure, the composition 
comprising a superconductive transition temperature Tc of 
greater than or equal to 26°K, said superconductive 
composition includes at least one element selected from the 
group consisting of a Group II A element, at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of a rare earth 
element and at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a Group III B element; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition 
temperature Tc of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 277 of 575 




CLAIM 272 

Claim 272 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 272 An apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a layer- 
type perovskite-like crystal structure, the copper-oxide 
compound including at least one element selected from the 
group consisting of a group II A element, at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of a rare earth 
element and at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a Group III B element, the composition 
comprising a superconductive-resistive transition 
temperature defining a superconductive/resistive-transition 
temperature range between an upper limit defined by a 
transition-onset temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by 
an effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature 
Tp=0, the transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than 
or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 278 of 575 



CLAIM 273 

CLAIM 273 recites: 

CLAIM 273 An apparatus comprising a composition 
comprising a transition temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K, the composition including a rare earth or alkaline earth 
element, a transition metal element capable of exhibiting 
multivalent states and oxygen , including at least one phase 
that exhibits superconductivity at temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, a temperature controller for maintaining said 
composition at said temperature to exhibit said 
superconductivity and a source of an electrical 
superconducting current through said composition with said 
phrase exhibiting said superconductivity. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 279 of 575 



CLAIM 274 



Claim 274 recites: 

CLAIM 274 An apparatus comprising providing a 
superconducting transition metal oxide comprising a 
superconductive onset temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K, a temperature controller for maintaining said 
superconducting transition metal oxide at a temperature less 
than said superconducting onset temperature and a source 
of a superconducting current therein. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 280 of 575 



CLAIM 275 



Claim 275 recites: 

CLAIM 275 An apparatus comprising a superconducting 
copper oxide comprising a superconductive onset 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, a temperature 
controller for maintaining said superconducting copper oxide 
at a temperature less than said superconducting onset 
temperature and a source of a superconducting current in 
said superconducting oxide. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 281 of 575 





CLAIM 276 



Claim 276 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 276 An apparatus comprising a superconducting 
oxide composition comprising a superconductive onset 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K , a temperature 
controller for maintaining said superconducting copper oxide 
at a temperature less than said superconducting onset 
temperature and a source of a superconducting current 
therein, said composition comprising at least one each of 
rare earth, an alkaline earth, and copper. 



CLAIM 277 An apparatus comprising a superconducting 
oxide composition comprising a superconductive onset 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, a temperature 
controller for maintaining said superconducting copper oxide 
at a temperature less than said superconducting onset 
temperature and a source of a superconducting electrical 
current therein, said composition comprising at least one 
each of a Group III B element, an alkaline earth, and copper. 



CLAIM 277 



Claim 277 which is allowed recites: 



Volume 3 



Page 282 of 575 



CLAIM 278 



CLAIM 278 recites: 

CLAIM 278 An apparatus comprising a source of a 
superconducting electrical current in a transition metal oxide 
comprising a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K and a 
temperature controller for maintaining said transition metal 
oxide at a temperature less than said Tc. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 283 of 575 




CLAIM 279 

CLAIM 279 recites: 

CLAIM 279 An apparatus comprising a source of a 
superconducting current in a copper oxide comprising a Tc 
greater than or equal to 26°K and a temperature controller 
for maintaining said copper oxide at a temperature less than 
said Tc. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 284 of 575 





CLAIM 280 



Claim 280 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 280 An apparatus comprising: 



a composition of the formula Ba x La x -5, Cu 5 O y , wherein x is 
from about 0.75 to about 1 and y is the oxygen deficiency 
resulting from annealing said composition at temperatures 
from about 540°C to about 950°C and for times of about 15 
minutes to about 12 hours, said composition comprising a 
metal oxide phase which exhibits a superconducting state at 
a critical temperature greater than or equal to 26°K; 

a temperature controller for maintaining the temperature of 
said composition at a temperature less than said critical 
temperature to induce said superconducting state in said 
metal oxide phase; and 

a source of an electrical current through said composition 
while said metal oxide phase is in said superconducting 
state. 



CLAIM 281 An apparatus comprising a source of a 
superconducting electrical current in a composition of matter 
comprising a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K, said 



CLAIM 281 



Claim 281 which is allowed recites: 



Volume 3 



Page 285 of 575 




I 



composition comprising at least one each of a III B element, 
an alkaline earth, and copper oxide and a temperature 
controller for maintaining said composition of matter at a 
temperature less than Tc. 



CLAIM 282 

Claim 282 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 282 An apparatus comprising a source of a 
superconducting electrical current in a composition of matter 
comprising a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K, said 
composition comprising at least one each of a rare earth, 
alkaline earth, and copper oxide and a temperature 
controller for maintaining said composition of matter at a 
temperature less than said Tc. 



Volume 3 



Page 286 of 575 



CLAIM 283 



CLAIM 283 recites: 

CLAIM 283 An apparatus comprising a source of a 
superconducting electrical current in a composition of matter 
comprising a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K, said 
composition comprising at least one each of a rare earth, 
and copper oxide and a temperature controller for 
maintaining said composition of matter at a temperature less 
than said Tc. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 287 of 575 




CLAIM 284 

CLAIM 284 recites: 

CLAIM 284 An apparatus comprising a source of a 
superconducting electrical current in a composition of matter 
comprising a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K carrying, said 
composition comprising at least one each of a III B element, 
and copper oxide and a temperature controller for 
maintaining said composition of matter at a temperature less 
than said Tc. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 288 of 575 




CLAIM 285 

CLAIM 285 recites: 

CLAIM 285 An apparatus comprising a source of a 
superconducting electrical current in a transition metal oxide 
comprising a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K and a 
temperature controller for maintaining said transition metal 
oxide at a temperature less than said Tc. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 289 of 575 




CLAIM 286 

CLAIM 286 recites: 

CLAIM 286 An apparatus comprising a source of a 
superconducting electrical current in a copper oxide 
composition of matter comprising a Tc greater than or equal 
to 26°K and a temperature controller for maintaining said 
copper oxide composition of matter at a temperature less 
than said Tc. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 290 of 575 



CLAIM 287 



Claim 287 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 287 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition including a transition metal, a group 1MB 
element, an alkaline earth element, and oxygen, where said 
composition is a mixed transition metal oxide comprising a 
non-stoichiometric amount of oxygen therein and exhibiting a 
superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K, 

a temperature controller for maintaining said composition in 
said superconducting state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, and 

a source of an electrical current through said composition 
while said composition is in said superconducting state. 

CLAIM 288 

Claim 288 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 288 An apparatus according to claim 287, where 
said transition metal is copper. 



Volume 3 



Page 291 of 575 



CLAIM 289 

CLAIM 289 recites: 

CLAIM 289 An apparatus for causing electric current flow in 
a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a 
substantially layered oerovskite crystal structure , the 
composition comprising a superconductor transition 
temperature Tc of greater than or equal to 26°K; 

b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition 
temperature Tc of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 



Volume 3 



Page 292 of 575 



Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 293 of 575 



CLAIM 290 



CLAIM 290 recites: 

CLAIM 290 An apparatus according to claim 289 in which 
the copper-oxide compound of the superconductive 
composition includes at least one element selected from the 
group consisting of a rare-earth element and a Group III B 
element and at least one alkaline-earth element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 294 of 575 




CLAIM 291 

CLAIM 291 recites: 

CLAIM 291 An apparatus according to claim 290 in which 
the rare-earth or element is lanthanum . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 295 of 575 



CLAIM 292 

CLAIM 292 recites: 

CLAIM 292 An apparatus according to claim 290 in which 
the alkaline-earth element is barium. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 296 of 575 



CLAIM 293 



CLAIM 293 recites: 

CLAIM 293 An apparatus according to claim 289 in which 
the copper-oxide compound of the superconductive 
composition includes mixed valent copper ions . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 297 of 575 




CLAIM 294 

CLAIM 294 recites: 

CLAIM 294 An apparatus according to claim 293 in which 
the cooper-oxide compound includes at least one element in 
a nonstoichiometric atomic proportion . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 298 of 575 



CLAIM 295 



CLAIM 295 recites: 

CLAIM 295 An apparatus according to claim 294 in which 
oxygen is present in the copper-oxide compound in a 
nonstoichiometric atomic proportion . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 299 of 575 




CLAIM 296 

Claim 296 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 296 An apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a 
substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the 
copper-oxide compound including at least one element 

.selected from the group consisting of a rare-earth element 
and a Group III B element and at least one alkaline-earth 
element, the composition comprising a 
superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 300 of 575 



CLAIM 297 

Claim 297 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 297 An apparatus according to claim 296 in which 
said at least one element is lanthanum. 



CLAIM 298 



Claim 298 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 298 An apparatus according to claim 296 in which 
the alkaline-earth element is barium. 



CLAIM 299 



Claim 299 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 299 An apparatus according to claim 296 in which 
the copper-oxide compound of the superconductive 
composition includes mixed valent copper ions. 



Volume 3 



Page 301 of 575 



CLAIM 300 



Claim 300 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 300 An apparatus according to claim 299 in which 
the copper-oxide compound includes at least one element in 
a nonstoichiometric atomic proportion. 

CLAIM 301 

Claim 301 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 301 An apparatus according to claim 300 in which 
oxygen is present in the copper-oxide compound in a 
nonstoichiometric atomic proportion. 



Volume 3 



Page 302 of 575 



CLAIM 302 

CLAIM 302 recites: 

CLAIM 302 An apparatus for causing electric-current flow in 
a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a 
substantially layered perovskite crystal structure , the 
composition comprising a superconductive transition 
temperature Tc of greater than or equal to 26°K, said 
superconductive composition includes at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a Group II A element, a 
rare earth element; and a Group III B element; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition 
temperature Tc of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 



Volume 3 



Page 303 of 575 



shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 304 of 575 




CLAIM 303 

CLAIM 303 recites: 

CLAIM 303 An apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a 
substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the copper- 
oxide compound including at least one element selected 
from the group consisting of a Group II A element, a rare 
earth element and a Group III B element , the composition 
comprising a superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 



Volume 3 



Page 305 of 575 



cannot, based on Applicants 1 teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants 1 Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 306 of 575 




CLAIM 304 

Claim 304 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 304 An apparatus for causing electric-current flow in 
a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a 
substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the 
composition comprising a superconductive transition 
temperature Tc of greater than or equal to 

26°K, said superconductive composition includes at least 
one element selected from the group consisting of a Group II 
A element and at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a rare earth element and a Group 1MB element; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition 
temperature Tc of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 307 of 575 




CLAIM 305 



Claim 305 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 305 An apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a 
substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the copper- 
oxide compound including at least one element selected 
from the group consisting of a Group II A element and at 
least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
rare earth element and a Group III B element, the 
composition comprising a superconductive/resistive 
transition defining a superconductive-resistive-transition 
temperature range between an upper limit defined by a 
transition-onset temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by 
an effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature 
Tp=0, the transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than 
or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 308 of 575 




CLAIM 306 

Claim 306 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 306 An apparatus for causing electric-current flow in 
a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a transition metal oxide compound comprising 
a substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the 
composition comprising a superconductive transition 
temperature Tc of greater than or equal to 26°K, said 
superconductive composition includes at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a Group II A element 
and at least one element selected from the group consisting 
of a rare earth element and a Group III B element; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26° K and below the superconductor transition Tc of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 309 of 575 




CLAIM 307 

Claim 307 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 307 An apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a transition metal-oxide compound comprising 
a substantially layered perovskite crystal structure, the 
transition metal-oxide compound including at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of a Group II A 
element and at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a rare earth element and a Group 1MB element, 
the composition comprising a superconductive/resistive 
transition defining a superconductive/resistive-transition 
temperature range between an upper limit defined by a 
transition-onset temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by 
an effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature 
Tp=0, the transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than 
or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 310 of 575 



CLAIM 308 



CLAIM 308 recites: 

CLAIM 308 An apparatus according to claim 273 wherein 
said composition comprises a substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 31 1 of 575 



CLAIM 309 



CLAIM 309 recites: 

CLAIM 309 An apparatus according to claim 274 wherein 
said superconducting transition metal oxide comprises a 
substantially layered perovskite crystal structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants 1 evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 312 of 575 



CLAIM 310 



CLAIM 310 recites: 

CLAIM 310 An apparatus according to claim 275 wherein 
said superconducting copper oxide comprises a substantially 
layered perovskite crystal structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 31 3 of 575 




CLAIM 311 

Claim 31 1 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 31 1 An apparatus according to claim 276 wherein 
said superconducting oxide composition comprises a 
substantially layered perovskite crystal structure. 

CLAIM 312 

Claim 31 2 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 312 An apparatus according to claim 277 wherein 
said superconducting oxide composition comprises a 
substantially layered perovskite crystal structure. 



Volume 3 



Page 314 of 575 



CLAIM 313 



CLAIM 313 recites: 

CLAIM 313 An apparatus according to claim 278 wherein 
said transition metal oxide comprises a substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 315 of 575 



CLAIM 314 



CLAIM 314 recites: 

CLAIM 314 An apparatus according to claim 279 wherein 
said copper oxide comprises a substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 316 of 575 



CLAIM 315 



Claim 315 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 315 An apparatus according to claim 280 wherein 
said composition comprises a substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure . 



CLAIM 316 

Claim 316 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 316 An apparatus according to claim 281 wherein 
said composition of matter comprises a substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure. 



CLAIM 317 

Claim 317 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 317 An apparatus according to claim 282 wherein 
said composition of matter comprises substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure. 



Volume 3 



Page 317 of 575 



CLAIM 318 



CLAIM 318 recites: 

CLAIM 318 An apparatus according to claim 283 wherein 
said composition of matter comprises a substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 318 of 575 



CLAIM 319 



CLAIM 31 9 recites: 

CLAIM 319 An apparatus according to claim 284 wherein 
said composition of matter comprises substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants 1 evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 319 of 575 




CLAIM 320 

CLAIM 320 recites: 

CLAIM 320 An apparatus according to claim 285 wherein 
said transition metal oxide comprises substantially layered 
perovskite crystal structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 

those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 

shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 320 of 575 



CLAIM 321 



CLAIM 321 recites: 

CLAIM 321 An apparatus according to claim 286 wherein 
said copper oxide composition comprises substantially 
layered perovskite crystal structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 321 of 575 




CLAIM 322 

CLAIM 322 recites: 

CLAIM 322 A superconductive combination according to 
anyone of claims 84 or 85, wherein said mixed transition 
metal oxide can be made according to known principles of 
ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 
The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states " Generally, 
superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of a material 
since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that cause them 
to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for example, become 
superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure converts them to 
metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants discovered that 
ceramic materials are superconductors. . 



Volume 3 



Page 322 of 575 



CLAIM 323 



CLAIM 323 recites: 

CLAIM 323 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 86, 
87, 144, 146, 147, 163, 164, 168, 169, 173, 174, 178, 182, 
189, 196, 197, 214, 224, 235, 236, 237, 239, 254, 255, 259, 
260, 264, 265 or 273, wherein said composition can be 
made according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 
The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states " Generally, 
superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of a material 
since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that cause them 
to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for example, become 
superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure converts them to 
metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants discovered that 
ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 323 of 575 



CLAIM 324 



CLAIM 324 recites: 

CLAIM 324 A combination according to anyone of claims 
91 , 92 or 36 to 39, wherein said composition can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states " Generally, 
superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of a material 
since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that cause them 
to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for example, become 
superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure converts them to 
metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants discovered that 
ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 324 of 575 



CLAIM 325 



CLAIM 325 recites: 

CLAIM 325 A superconductive apparatus according to 
anyone of claims 1 to 1 1 , 33 to 35, 66 to 68,109, 130, 361- 
366 or 370, wherein said composition can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states " Generally, 
superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of a material 
since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that cause them 
to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for example, become 
superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure converts them to 
metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants discovered that 
ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 325 of 575 




CLAIM 326 

CLAIM 326 recites: 

CLAIM 326 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 93 
to 95 or 138, wherein said mixed copper oxide can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states " Generally, 
superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of a material 
since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that cause them 
to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for example, become 
superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure converts them to 
metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants discovered that 
ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 326 of 575 



CLAIM 327 



CLAIM 327 recites: 

CLAIM 327 A combination according to anyone of claims 64 
or 135, wherein said mixed copper oxide can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states " Generally, 
superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of a material 
since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that cause them 
to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for example, become 
superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure converts them to 
metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants discovered that 
ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 327 of 575 




CLAIM 328 

CLAIM 328 recites: 

CLAIM 328 A superconductive apparatus according to 
anyone of claims 48 to 52, 96 to 1 08, 198 to 204, 371 , 383 
or 384, wherein said superconductive composition can be 
made according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states " Generally, 
superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of a material 
since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that cause them 
to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for example, become 
superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure converts them to 
metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants discovered that 
ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 328 of 575 



CLAIM 329 



CLAIM 329 recites: 

CLAIM 329 A superconductive combination according to 
anyone of claims 12 to 23, 1 10, 131 , 132 or 367-370, 
wherein said superconductive composition can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 
The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states " Generally, 
superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of a material 
since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that cause them 
to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for example, become 
superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure converts them to 
metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants discovered that 
ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 329 of 575 




CLAIM 330 

Claim 330 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 330 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 185 
or 220, wherein said superconductive composition can be 
made according to known principles of ceramic science. 



Volume 3 



Page 330 of 575 



CLAIM 331 

CLAIM 331 recites: 

CLAIM 331 A device according to claim 111, wherein said 
superconductive transition metal oxide can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states " Generally, 
superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of a material 
since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that cause them 
to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for example, become 
superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure converts them to 
metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants discovered that 
ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 331 of 575 




CLAIM 332 

CLAIM 332 recites: 

CLAIM 332 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
183, 217, 218, 274 or 309, wherein said superconductive 
transition metal oxide can be made according to known 
principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states " Generally, 
superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of a material 
since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that cause them 
to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for example, become 
superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure converts them to 



Volume 3 



Page 332 of 575 



metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants discovered that 
ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 333 of 575 



CLAIM 333 

CLAIM 333 recites: 

CLAIM 333 A device according to claim 112, wherein said 
superconductive copper oxide can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states " Generally, 
superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of a material 
since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that cause them 
to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for example, become 
superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure converts them to 
metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants discovered that 
ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 334 of 575 




CLAIM 334 

CLAIM 334 recites: 

CLAIM 334 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
275, 276, 310 or 31 1 , wherein said superconductive copper 
oxide can be made according to known principles of ceramic 
science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states " Generally, 
superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of a material 
since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that cause 
them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for example, 
become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure converts 
them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants discovered 
that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 335 of 575 



• 



CLAIM 335 

Claim 335 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 335 A device according to claim 113, wherein said 
superconductive oxide composition can be made according 
to known principles of ceramic science. 



CLAIM 336 

Claim 336 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 336 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
186, 221 , 272, 312 or 413, wherein said superconductive 
oxide composition can be made according to known 
principles of ceramic science. 



Volume 3 



Page 336 of 575 



CLAIM 337 



CLAIM 337 recites: 

CLAIM 337 A device according to anyone of claims 1 14 or 
1 1 7, wherein said transition metal oxide can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states " Generally, 
superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of a material 
since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that cause them 
to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for example, become 
superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure converts them to 
metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants discovered that 
ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 337 of 575 




CLAIM 338 

CLAIM 338 recites: 

CLAIM 338 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 24 
to 26, 60 to 63, 116, 141 to 143, 172, 187, 222, 232 to 234, 
263, 278, 285, 287, 288, 313 or 320, wherein said transition 
metal oxide can be made according to known principles of 
ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states " Generally, 
superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of a material 
since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that cause them 
to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for example, become 
superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure converts them to 



Volume 3 



Page 338 of 575 



metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants discovered that 
ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 339 of 575 




CLAIM 339 

CLAIM 339 recites: 

CLAIM 339 A superconductive apparatus according to 
anyone of claims 27-32, 132 or 370, wherein said transition 
metal oxide can be made according to known principles of 
ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1 988, 1 995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
" Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 340 of 575 



CLAIM 340 

CLAIM 340 recites: 

CLAIM 340 An invention according to claim 118, wherein 
said transition metal oxide can be made according to known 
principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
" Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 341 of 575 



CLAIM 341 



CLAIM 341 recites: 

CLAIM 341 A transition metal oxide device according to 
claim 128, wherein said transition metal oxide can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
" Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 342 of 575 



CLAIM 342 



CLAIM 342 recites: 

CLAIM 342 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 40 
to 45, wherein said superconductor can be made according 
to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
" Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 343 of 575 



CLAIM 343 



CLAIM 343 recites: 

CLAIM 343 A device according to anyone of claims 1 19 or 
121 . wherein said copper oxide can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
" Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 344 of 575 




CLAIM 344 

CLAIM 344 recites: 

CLAIM 344 An apparatus according to claim 120, wherein 
said copper oxide can be made according to known 
principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
" Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 345 of 575 




CLAIM 345 

CLAIM 345 recites: 

CLAIM 345 An invention according to claim 122, wherein 
said copper oxide can be made according to known 
principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
" Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 346 of 575 



CLAIM 346 



Claim 346 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 346 A superconductive apparatus according to claim 
123, wherein said copper oxide can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science. 



Volume 3 



Page 347 of 575 



CLAIM 347 



CLAIM 347 recites: 

CLAIM 347 A copper oxide device according to claim 129, 
wherein said copper oxide can be made according to known 
principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants 1 teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
" Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 348 of 575 



CLAIM 348 



CLAIM 348 recites: 

CLAIM 348 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
162, 167, 177, 188, 223, 253, 258, 268, 269, 270, 279 or 
314, wherein said copper oxide can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
" Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 349 of 575 



CLAIM 349 



CLAIM 349 recites: 

CLAIM 349 A combination according to claim 57, wherein 
said superconductive oxide can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
" Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 350 of 575 




CLAIM 350 

CLAIM 350 recites: 

CLAIM 350 A combination according to anyone of claims 58 
or 373, wherein said copper oxide conductor can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
" Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 351 of 575 




CLAIM 351 

CLAIM 351 recites: 

CLAIM 351 A combination according to claim 59, wherein 
said ceramic-like material can be made according to known 
principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
" Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 352 of 575 



CLAIM 352 



CLAIM 352 recites: 

CLAIM 352 A superconductive combination according to 
anyone of claims 69 to 71 or 1 34, wherein said 
superconductive composition can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
" Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 353 of 575 



CLAIM 353 



CLAIM 353 recites: 

CLAIM 353 A superconductive apparatus according to 
anyone of claims 1 39, 1 40, 1 49 to 1 55, 1 56 to 1 61 , 1 70, 1 71 , 
1 75, 1 76, 1 80, 1 81 , 205 to 21 6, 387-393, or 396-401 , 
wherein said superconductive composition can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
" Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 



Volume 3 



Page 354 of 575 



converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 355 of 575 



CLAIM 354 



CLAIM 354 recites: 

CLAIM 354 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
165, 166, 185, 220, 240 to 246, 247 to 252, 261 , 262, 289, 
290 to 301, 394, 395, 402-406, 409 or 410, wherein said 
superconductive composition can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 



Volume 3 



Page 356 of 575 



converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 357 of 575 



CLAIM 355 



CLAIM 355 recites: 

CLAIM 355 A combination according to anyone of claims 77 
to 81 , 1 86, 379 or 380, wherein said mixed cooper oxide 
composition can be made according to known principles of 
ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 358 of 575 



CLAIM 356 

CLAIM 356 recites: 

CLAIM 356 A device according to anyone of claims 124 to 
127, wherein said composition of matter can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 359 of 575 



CLAIM 357 



CLAIM 357 recites: 

CLAIM 357 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 190 
to 194, 225 to 229, 231 , 256, 257, 266, 267, 271 , 272, 281 to 
284, 317 to 319, 407, or 41 1 to 413, wherein said 
composition of matter can be made according to known 
principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 



Volume 3 



Page 360 of 575 



converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 361 of 575 



CLAIM 358 

Claim 358 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 358 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 1 86 or 221 , wherein 
said superconductive oxide composition can be made according to known 
principles of ceramic science. 



Volume 3 



Page 362 of 575 




CLAIM 359 

CLAIM 359 recites: 

CLAIM 359 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 195 
or 230, wherein said copper oxide composition can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 363 of 575 



CLAIM 360 

CLAIM 360 recites: 

CLAIM 360 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 286 
or 321 , wherein said copper oxide composition can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 364 of 575 



CLAIM 361 

CLAIM 361 recites: 

CLAIM 361 A superconducting apparatus comprising a 
composition having a transition temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, the composition including a rare earth or an 
element comprising a rare earth characteristic, a transition 
metal element capable of exhibiting multivalent states and 
oxvaen. including at least one phase that exhibits 
superconductivity at temperature greater than or equal to 
26°K, a temperature controller for maintaining said 
composition at said temperature to exhibit said 
superconductivity and a current source for passing an 
electrical superconducting current through said composition 
while exhibiting said superconductivity. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 365 of 575 



CLAIM 362 



CLAIM 362 recites: 

CLAIM 362 The superconducting apparatus of claim 361 , 
further including an alkaline earth element substituted for at 
least one atom of said rare earth or element comprising a 
rare earth characteristic in said composition . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 366 of 575 



CLAIM 363 



CLAIM 363 recites: 

CLAIM 363 The superconducting apparatus of claim 362, 
where said rare earth or element comprising a rare earth 
characteristic is selected from the group consisting of La. 
Nd. and Ce . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 367 of 575 



CLAIM 364 



CLAIM 364 recites: 

CLAIM 364 The superconducting apparatus of claim 361 , 
where said phase is crystalline with a structure comprising a 
perovskite characteristic . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 368 of 575 



CLAIM 365 



CLAIM 365 recites: 

CLAIM 365 The superconducting apparatus of claim 362, 
where said phase is crystalline with a structure comprising a 
perovskite characteristic . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 369 of 575 



CLAIM 366 



CLAIM 366 recites: 

CLAIM 366 The superconducting apparatus of claim 361 , 
where said phase exhibits a crystalline structure comprising 
a layered characteristic . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 370 of 575 



CLAIM 367 



CLAIM 367 recites: 

CLAIM 367 The combination of claim 15, where said 
additional element is a rare earth or an element comprising a 
rare earth characteristic . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1 988, 1 995 and 1 996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 371 of 575 



CLAIM 368 



CLAIM 368 recites: 

CLAIM 368 The combination of claim 12, where said 
composition includes a superconducting phase comprising a 
perovskite characteristic . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 372 of 575 



CLAIM 369 



CLAIM 369 recites: 

CLAIM 369 The combination of claim 20, where said 
substituted transition metal oxide has a structure comprising 
a layered characteristic . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 373 of 575 



CLAIM 370 



CLAIM 370 recites: 

CLAIM 370 The superconducting apparatus of claim 31 , 
where said crystalline structure comprises a layered 
characteristic , enhancing the number of Jahn-Teller polarons 
in said composite. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 374 of 575 



CLAIM 371 



CLAIM 371 recites: 

CLAIM 371 The superconductive apparatus of claim 48, 
where said substitutions include a rare earth or an element 
comprising a rare earth characteristic . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 375 of 575 



CLAIM 372 

CLAIM 372 recites: 

CLAIM 372 A superconductive apparatus comprised of a 
copper oxide comprising a crystalline structure comprising a 
layered characteristic and at least one additional element 
substituted in said crystalline structure, said structure being 
oxvoen deficient and exhibiting a superconducting onset 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 376 of 575 



CLAIM 373 



CLAIM 373 recites: 

CLAIM 373 A combination, comprised of: 

a copper oxide superconductor having a superconductor 
onset temperature greater than about 26° K including an 
element which results in a mixed valent state in said oxide, 
said oxide being crystalline and comprising a structure 
comprising a layered characteristic . 

a current source for passing a superconducting current 
through said copper oxide while it is maintained at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and less than said 
superconducting onset temperature, and 

a temperature controller for cooling said copper oxide to a 
superconductive state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K and less than said superconducting onset 
temperature. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 



Volume 3 



Page 377 of 575 



Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 378 of 575 




CLAIM 374 

CLAIM 374 recites: 

CLAIM 374 A combination, comprised of: 

a material comprising a ceramic characteristic comprising an 
onset of superconductivity at an onset temperature greater 
than or equal to 26°K, 

a current source for passing a superconducting electrical 
current through said material comprising a ceramic 
characteristic while said material is maintained at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and less than said 
onset temperature, and 

a temperature controller for cooling said superconducting 
material having a ceramic characteristic to a 
superconductive state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26° K and less than said onset temperature, said material 
being superconductive at temperatures below said onset 
temperature and a ceramic at temperatures above said 
onset temperature. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 



Volume 3 



Page 379 of 575 



Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 380 of 575 





CLAIM 375 



Claim 375 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 375 An apparatus comprising a composition 
exhibiting superconductivity at temperatures greater than or 
equal to 26° K, said composition being a material comprising 
a ceramic characteristic in the RE-AE-TM-0 system, where 
RE is a rare earth or near rare earth element, AE is an 
alkaline earth element, TM is a multivalent transition metal 
element having at least two valence states in said 
composition, and O is oxygen, the ratio of the amounts of 
said transition metal in said two valence states being 
determined by the ratio RE : AE, a source of current for 
passing a superconducting electric current in said transition 
metal oxide, and a cooling apparatus for maintaining said 
transition metal oxide below said onset temperature and at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K. 



Volume 3 



Page 381 of 575 



CLAIM 376 



CLAIM 376 recites: 

CLAIM 376 The combination of claim 71 , where said mixed 
copper oxide further includes a rare earth or an element 
comprising a rare earth characteristic . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 382 of 575 



CLAIM 377 



Claim 377 is withdrawn. 



CLAIM 378 



Claim 378 is withdrawn. 



Volume 3 



Page 383 of 575 



CLAIM 379 



THIS CLAIM SHOULD BE ALLOWED FOR THE SAME 
REASON THAT CLAIM 77 IS ALLOWED 

CLAIM 379 recites: 

CLAIM 379 A combination, comprising: 

a mixed copper oxide composition including an alkaline earth 
element (AE) and a rare earth or element (RE) comprising a 
rare earth characteristic, said composition comprising a 
crystalline structure comprising a layered characteristic and 
multi-valent oxidation states , said composition exhibiting a 
substantially zero resistance to the flow of electrical current 
therethrough when cooled to a superconducting state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, said mixed 
copper oxide having a superconducting onset temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, and 

a current source for passing an electrical superconducting 
current through said composition when said composition 
exhibits substantially zero resistance at a temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K and less than said onset 
temperature. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 



Volume 3 



Page 384 of 575 



shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 385 of 575 



CLAIM 380 



THIS CLAIM SHOULD BE ALLOWED FOR THE SAME 
REASON THAT CLAIM 77 IS ALLOWED 

CLAIM 380 recites: 

CLAIM 380 The combination of claim 379, wherein said 
crystalline structure comprises a oerovskite characteristic . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 386 of 575 



CLAIM 381 



Claim 381 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 381 An apparatus comprising a superconductor 
having a superconducting onset temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, said superconductor being comprised of a 
rare earth or an element (RE) comprising a rare earth 
characteristic, an alkaline earth element (AE), a transition 
metal element (TM), and Oxygen (O) and having the general 
formula RE-AE-TM-O, said superconductor being made by a 
method comprising the steps of combining said rare earth or 
element comprising a rare earth characteristic, said alkaline 
earth element and said transition metal element in the 
presence of oxygen to produce a mixed transition metal 
oxide including said rare earth or element comprising a rare 
earth characteristic and said alkaline earth element therein, 
and 

heating said mixed transition metal oxide to produce 
superconductor having a crystalline structure comprising a 
layered characteristic and exhibiting a superconducting 
onset temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, said 
superconductor having a non-stoichiometric amount of 
oxygen therein. 



Volume 3 



Page 387 of 575 



CLAIM 382 



CLAIM 382 recites: 

CLAIM 382 The apparatus of claim 93, where said copper 
oxide material exhibits a crystalline structure comprising a 
layered characteristic . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 388 of 575 



CLAIM 383 



CLAIM 383 recites: 

CLAIM 383 A superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition comprising a 
copper-oxide compound having a crystal structure 
comprising a perovskite characteristic and a layered 
characteristic , the composition having a superconductor 
transition temperature Tc of greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition 
temperature Tc of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source for causing an electric current to flow in 
the superconductor element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 



Volume 3 



Page 389 of 575 




Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 390 of 575 





CLAIM 384 



Claim 384 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 384 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 383 in which the copper-oxide compound of the 
superconductive composition includes at least one rare-earth 
or element comprising a rare earth characteristic and at least 
one alkaline-earth element. 



CLAIM 385 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 384 in which the rare-earth or element comprising a 
rare earth characteristic is lanthanum. 



CLAIM 386 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 



CLAIM 385 



Claim 385 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 386 



Claim 386 which is allowed recites: 



Volume 3 



Page 391 of 575 




structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the copper-oxide compound 
including at least one rare-earth or element comprising a 
rare earth characteristic and at least one alkaline-earth 
element, the composition having a superconductive/resistive 
transition defining a superconductive/resistive-transition 
temperature range between an upper limit defined by a 
transition-onset temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by 
an effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature 
Tq=o, the transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than 
or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tq=o of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source for causing an electric current to flow in 
the superconductor element. 

CLAIM 387 

Claim 387 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 387 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 386 in which the rare-earth or an element comprising a 
rare earth characteristic is lanthanum. 



Volume 3 



Page 392 of 575 



CLAIM 388 



Claim 388 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 388 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition including a transition metal, a rare earth or an 
element comprising a rare earth characteristic, an alkaline 
earth element, and oxygen, where said composition is a 
mixed transition metal oxide having a non-stoichiometric 
amount of oxygen therein and exhibiting a superconducting 
state at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, 

a temperature controller maintaining said composition in said 
superconducting state at a temperature greater than or equal 
to 26°K, and 

a current source passing an electrical current through said 
composition while said composition is in said 
superconducting state. 



Volume 3 



Page 393 of 575 




CLAIM 389 

CLAIM 389 recites: 

CLAIM 389 A superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric current flow in a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a cooper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic , the composition having a 
superconductor transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and 
below the superconductor transition temperature Tc of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 



Volume 3 



Page 394 of 575 



Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 395 of 575 




CLAIM 390 

Claim 390 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 390 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 389 in which the copper-oxide compound of the 
superconductive composition includes at least one rare-earth 
or an element comprising a rare earth characteristic and at 
least one alkaline-earth element. 



CLAIM 391 

Claim 391 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 391 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 390 in which the rare-earth or an element comprising a 
rare earth characteristic is lanthanum. 



CLAIM 392 



Claim 392 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 392 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 



Volume 3 



Page 396 of 575 



structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the copper-oxide compound 
including at least one rare-earth or rare-earth-like element 
and at least one alkaline-earth element, the composition 
having a superconductive/resistive-transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- 
resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

CLAIM 393 

Claim 393 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 393 The superconductive apparatus according to 
claim 392 in which the rare-earth or an element comprising a 
rare earth characteristic is lanthanum. 



Volume 3 



Page 397 of 575 



CLAIM 394 



CLAIM 394 recites: 

CLAIM 394 An apparatus for causing electric-current flow in 
a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic , the composition having a 
superconductive transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K, said superconductive composition includes at 
least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
Group II A element, a rare earth element: and a Group III B 
element : 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and 
below the superconductor transition temperature Tc of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 



Volume 3 



Page 398 of 575 




those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 399 of 575 



CLAIM 395 



CLAIM 395 recites: 

CLAIM 395 An apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the copper-oxide compound 
including at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a Group II A element, a rare earth element and 
a Group III B element, the composition having a 
superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 , the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- 
resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 of the superconductive 
composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 400 of 575 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 401 of 575 



CLAIM 396 



Claim 396 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 396 A superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the composition having a 
superconductive transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K, said superconductive composition includes at 
least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
Group II A element and at least one element selected from 
the group consisting of a rare earth element and a Group III 
B element; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and 
below the superconductor transition temperature Tc of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 402 of 575 




CLAIM 397 

Claim 397 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 397 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the copper-oxide compound 
including at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a Group II A element and at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a rare earth element 
and a Group III B element, the composition having a 
superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive-resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 , the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- 
resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 of the superconductive 
composition; and 



Volume 3 



Page 403 of 575 



(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

CLAIM 398 

Claim 398 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 398 A superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a 
superconductive composition, the superconductive 
composition consisting essentially of a transition 
metal oxide compound comprising a crystal structure 
comprising a layered characteristic and a perovskite 
characteristic, the composition having a 
superconductive transition temperature Tc of greater 
than or equal to 26°K, said superconductive 
composition includes an element selected from the 
group consisting of a Group II A element and at least 
one element selected from the group consisting of a 
rare earth element and a Group III B element; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater 
than or equal to 26°K and below the superconductor 
transition Tc of the superconductive composition; and 



Volume 3 



Page 404 of 575 




(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow 
in the superconductor element. 

CLAIM 399 

Claim 399 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 399 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a transition metal-oxide compound comprising 
a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the transition metal-oxide 
compound including at least one element selected from the 
group consisting of a Group II A element and at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of a rare earth 
element and a Group III B element, the composition having a 
superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- 



Volume 3 



Page 405 of 575 



resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of the superconductive 
composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

CLAIM 400 

Claim 400 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 400 A superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the composition having a 
superconductive transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K, said superconductive composition includes a 
Group II A element, and at least one element selected from 
the group consisting of a rare earth element and a Group III 
B element; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and 
below the superconductor transition temperature Tc of the 
superconductive composition; and 



Volume 3 



Page 406 of 575 



(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

CLAIM 401 

Claim 401 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 401 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the copper-oxide compound 
including Group II A element, and at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a rare earth element 
and a Group III B element, the composition having a 
superconductive-resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- 



Volume 3 



Page 407 of 575 




resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of the superconductive 
composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 408 of 575 



CLAIM 402 

CLAIM 402 recites: 

CLAIM 402 An apparatus capable of carrying electric 
current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic , the composition comprising a 
superconductor transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition 
temperature Tc of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 



Volume 3 



Page 409 of 575 



Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 410 of 575 



CLAIM 403 



Claim 403 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 403 An apparatus according to claim 402 in which 
the copper-oxide compound of the superconductive 
composition includes at least one rare-earth or an element 
comprising a rare earth characteristic and at least one 
alkaline-earth element. 



CLAIM 404 

Claim 404 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 404 An apparatus according to claim 403 in which 
the rare-earth or element comprising a rare earth 
characteristic is lanthanum. 



CLAIM 405 

Claim 405 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 405 An apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a layer- 
type perovskite-like crystal structure, the copper-oxide 



Volume 3 



Page 41 1 of 575 



compound comprising at least one rare-earth or element 
comprising a rare earth characteristic and at least one 
alkaline-earth element, the composition comprising a 
superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



CLAIM 406 

Claim 406 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 406 An apparatus according to claim 405 in which 
the rare-earth or element comprising a rare earth 
characteristic is lanthanum. 



Volume 3 



Page 412 of 575 



CLAIM 407 



CLAIM 407 recites: 

CLAIM 407 An apparatus capable of carrying an electric- 
current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic , the composition comprising a 
superconductive transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K, said superconductive composition includes at 
least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
Group II A element a rare earth element: and a Group III B 
element : 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition 
temperature Tc of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 



Volume 3 



Page 413 of 575 



those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants 1 Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 414 of 575 




CLAIM 408 

CLAIM 408 recites: 

CLAIM 408 An apparatus capable of carrying an electric 
current essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a cooper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the copper-oxide compound 
including at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a Group II A element, a rare earth element and 
a Group III B element , the composition comprising a 
superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 415 of 575 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants 1 evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 416 of 575 




CLAIM 409 



Claim 409 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 409 An apparatus capable of carrying an electric- 
current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the composition comprising a 
superconductive transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K, said superconductive composition includes at 
least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
Group II A element and at least one element selected from 
the group consisting of a rare earth element and a Group III 
B element; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition 
temperature Tc of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 417 of 575 




CLAIM 410 



Claim 410 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 410 An apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 



(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the copper-oxide compound 
including at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a Group II A element and at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a rare earth element 
and a Group III B element, the composition comprising a 
superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive-resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 , the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 418 of 575 




CLAIM 411 

Claim 41 1 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 41 1 An apparatus capable of carrying an electric- 
current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a transition metal oxide compound comprising 
a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the composition comprising a 
superconductive transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K, said superconductive composition includes at 
least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
Group II A element and at least one element selected from 
the group consisting of a rare earth element and a Group III 
B element; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition Tc of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 419 of 575 




CLAIM 412 



Claim 412 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 412 An apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a transition metal-oxide compound comprising 
a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the transition metal-oxide 
compound including at least one element selected from the 
group consisting of a Group II A element and at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of a rare earth 
element and a Group III B element, the composition 
comprising a superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 420 of 575 



CLAIM 413 



Claim 413 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 413 An apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite characteristic, the copper-oxide compound 
including at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a group II A element, at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a rare earth element 
and at least one element selected from the group consisting 
of a Group III B element, the composition comprising a 
superconductive-resistive transition temperature defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of 
the superconductive composition; and 



Volume 3 



Page 421 of 575 



(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 422 of 575 



CLAIM 414 



CLAIM 414 recites: 

CLAIM 414 A superconducting apparatus according to 
anyone of claims 361-365 or 366, wherein said composition 
can be made according to known principles of ceramic 
science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 423 of 575 



CLAIM 415 

CLAIM 415 recites: 

CLAIM 415 A superconducting combination according to 
anyone of claims 367, 368 or 369, wherein said composition 
can be made according to known principles of ceramic 
science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 424 of 575 




CLAIM 416 

CLAIM 416 recites: 

CLAIM 416 A superconducting apparatus according to 
anyone of claims 370 or 371 , wherein said composition can 
be made according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 425 of 575 




CLAIM 417 

CLAIM 417 recites: 

CLAIM 417 A superconducting apparatus according to claim 
372, wherein said copper oxide can be made according to 
known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 426 of 575 



CLAIM 418 



CLAIM 418 recites: 

CLAIM 418 A combination according to claim 373, wherein 
said copper oxide can be made according to known 
principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants 1 teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 427 of 575 



CLAIM 419 



CLAIM 419 recites: 

CLAIM 419 A combination according to claim 374, wherein 
said material can be made bv known principles of ceramic 
science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 428 of 575 



CLAIM 420 

CLAIM 420 recites: 

CLAIM 420 A apparatus according to claim 375, wherein 
said composition can be made bv known principles of 
ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 429 of 575 




CLAIM 421 

CLAIM 421 recites: 

CLAIM 421 A combination according to claim 376, wherein 
said mixed copper oxide can be made bv known principles of 
ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 430 of 575 



CLAIM 422 



CLAIM 422 recites: 

CLAIM 422 A combination according to anyone of claims 
379 or 380, wherein said mixed copper oxide can be made 
bv known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 431 of 575 



CLAIM 423 



CLAIM 423 recites: 

CLAIM 423 A apparatus according to claim 382, wherein 
said copper oxide material can be made bv known principles 
of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 432 of 575 



CLAIM 424 



CLAIM 424 recites: 

CLAIM 424 A superconductive apparatus according to 
anyone of claims 383, 384, 385, 386, 387 and 389, wherein 
said composition can be made bv known principles of 
ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 433 of 575 



CLAIM 425 



CLAIM 425 recites: 

CLAIM 425 A apparatus according to claim 388, wherein 
said composition can be made according to known principles 
of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 434 of 575 



CLAIM 426 



CLAIM 426 recites: 

CLAIM 426 A superconductive apparatus according to 
anyone of claims 389 to 400 or 401 , wherein said 
superconductive composition can be made bv known 
principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 435 of 575 



CLAIM 427 

CLAIM 427 recites: 

CLAIM 427 A apparatus according to anyone of claims 402 
to 412 or 413. wherein said superconductive composition 
can be made bv known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 436 of 575 



CLAIM 428 

CLAIM 428 recites: 



CLAIM 428 An apparatus capable of carrying electric 
current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 



a superconductive element comprising a superconductive 
composition, said superconductive composition comprising 
Q and at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of Be. Mo. Ca. Sr. Ba. Ra. Sc. Y. La. Ce. Pr. Nd. 
Pm. Sm. Eu. Gd. Tb. Dv. Ho. Er. Tm. Yb. and Lu: and 



said composition comprising a superconductor transition 
temperature Tc of greater than or equal to 26°K. 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 437 of 575 




CLAIM 429 



CLAIM 429 recites: 



CLAIM 429 An apparatus according to claim 428, further 
including: 

a temperature controller for maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and 
below the superconductor transition temperature Tc of the 
superconductive composition; and 

a source of an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 438 of 575 



CLAIM 430 



CLAIM 430 recites: 

CLAIM 430 An apparatus according to claim 428, wherein 
said composition comprises a substantially layered structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 439 of 575 



CLAIM 431 

CLAIM 431 recites: 

CLAIM 431 An apparatus according to claim 429, wherein 
said composition comprises a substantially layered structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 440 of 575 



CLAIM 432 



CLAIM 432 recites: 

CLAIM 432 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 428 
to 430 or 431 , wherein said composition comprises a 
substantially perovskite crystal structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 441 of 575 



CLAIM 433 



CLAIM 433 recites: 

CLAIM 433 An apparatus according to any one of claims 
428 to 430 or 431 , wherein said composition comprises a 
perovskite-like structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 442 of 575 



CLAIM 434 

CLAIM 434 recites: 

CLAIM 434 An apparatus according to any one of claims 
428 to 430 or 431 , wherein said composition comprises a 
perovskite characteristic . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants 1 evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 443 of 575 



CLAIM 435 

CLAIM 435 recites: 

CLAIM 435 An apparatus according to any one of claims 
428 to 430 or 431 , wherein said composition comprises a 
perovskite related structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants 1 teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 444 of 575 



i 

1 



CLAIM 436 



CLAIM 436 recites: 

CLAIM 436 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 428 
to 431 or 432, wherein said composition can be made 
according to known principals of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 445 of 575 



CLAIM 437 



CLAIM 437 recites: 

CLAIM 437 An apparatus according to claim 88 wherein 
said composition is an oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 446 of 575 



CLAIM 438 



CLAIM 438 recites: 

CLAIM 438 An apparatus comprising: a means for 
conducting a superconducting current at a temperature 
greater than or eoual to 26°K and a current source for 
providing an electric current to flow in said means for 
conducting a superconducting current. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

This claim is in means plus function form and under In re Donaldson 29 USPQ 
2d 1845 (Fed. Cir. 1994) should be allowed since the Examiner has allowed 
claims to the specific examples described in Applicants' specification which 
corresponds to all of the allowed claims. The Examiner provides no reason for 
not following In re Donaldson. 



Volume 3 



Page 447 of 575 



CLAIM 439 



CLAIM 439 recites: 

CLAIM 439 An apparatus according to claim 438, wherein 
said means for conducting a superconductive current 
comprises a Tc greater than or equal to 26°K . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 448 of 575 



CLAIM 440 

CLAIM 440 recites: 

CLAIM 440 An apparatus according to claim 438, further 
including a temperature controller for maintaining said 
means for conducting a superconducting current at a said 
temperature . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

This claim is in means plus function form and under In re Donaldson 29 USPQ 
2d1845 (Fed. Cir. 1994) should be allowed since the Examiner has allowed 
claims to the specific examples described in Applicants' specification which 
corresponds to all of the allowed claims. The Examiner provides no reason for 
not following In re Donaldson. 



Volume 3 



Page 449 of 575 



CLAIM 441 

CLAIM 441 recites: 



CLAIM 441 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 or 440, wherein said means for conducting a 
superconducting current comprises oxygen . 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Pooie 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 450 of 575 



CLAIM 442 



CLAIM 442 recites: 

CLAIM 442 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein said means for conducting a 
superconducting current comprises one or more of the 
groups consisting of Be. Mo. Ca. Sr. Ba. Ra. Sc. Y. La. Ce. 
Pr. Nd. Pm. Sm. Eu. Gd. Tb. Dv. Ho. Er. Tm. Yb and Lu . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 451 of 575 



CLAIM 443 



CLAIM 443 recites: 

CLAIM 443 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 or 440, wherein said means for conducting a 
superconducting current comprises one or more of Be. Ma. 
Ca. Sr. Ba and Ra and one or more of Sc. Y. La. Ce. Pr. Nd. 
Pm. Sm. Eu. Gd. Tb. Dv. Ho. Er. Tm. Yb and Lu . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 452 of 575 





CLAIM 444 



CLAIM 444 recites: 



CLAIM 444 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein said means for conducting a 
superconducting current comprises a layered structure . 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 453 of 575 



CLAIM 445 



CLAIM 445 recites: 

CLAIM 445 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein said means for conducting a 
superconducting current comprises a substantially 
perovskite structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 454 of 575 



CLAIM 446 



CLAIM 446 recites: 

CLAIM 446 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein said means for conducting a 
superconducting current comprises a perovskite-like 
structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 455 of 575 



CLAIM 447 



CLAIM 447 recites: 

CLAIM 447 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein said means for conducting a 
superconducting current comprises a perovskite related 
structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 456 of 575 



CLAIM 448 



CLAIM 448 recites: 

CLAIM 448 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein said means for conducting a 
superconducting current comprises a structure having a 
perovskite characteristic . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 457 of 575 



CLAIM 449 



CLAIM 449 recites: 

CLAIM 449 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein said means for conducting a 
superconducting current comprises a transition metal . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 458 of 575 



CLAIM 450 



CLAIM 450 recites: 

CLAIM 450 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein said means for conducting a 
superconducting current comprises a copper oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 459 of 575 



CLAIM 451 



CLAIM 451 recites: 

CLAIM 451 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein said means for conducting a 
superconducting current comprises oxygen in a 
nonstoichiomeric amount . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 460 of 575 



CLAIM 452 

CLAIM 452 recites: 

CLAIM 452 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 and 440, wherein said means for conducting a 
superconducting current comprises a multivalent transition 
metal . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 461 of 575 



CLAIM 453 



CLAIM 453 recites: 

CLAIM 453 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
438, 439 or 440, wherein said means for conducting a 
superconducting current can be made according to known 
principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 462 of 575 



CLAIM 454 



CLAIM 454 recites: 

CLAIM 454 An apparatus according to claim 441 , wherein 
said means for conducting a superconducting current can be 
made according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 463 of 575 



CLAIM 455 



CLAIM 455 recites: 

CLAIM 455 An apparatus according to claim 442, wherein 
said means for conducting a superconducting current can be 
made according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 464 of 575 




CLAIM 456 

CLAIM 456 recites: 

CLAIM 456 An apparatus according to claim 443, wherein 
said means for conducting a superconducting current can be 
made according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 465 of 575 



CLAIM 457 



CLAIM 457 recites: 

CLAIM 457 An apparatus according to claim 444, wherein 
said means for conducting a superconducting current can be 
made according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 466 of 575 



CLAIM 458 

CLAIM 458 recites: 



CLAIM 458 An apparatus according to claim 445, wherein 
said means for conducting a superconducting current can be 
made according to known principles of ceramic science. 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 467 of 575 



CLAIM 459 



CLAIM 459 recites: 

CLAIM 459 An apparatus according to claim 446, wherein 
said means for conducting a superconducting current can be 
made according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 468 of 575 



CLAIM 460 



CLAIM 460 recites: 

CLAIM 460 An apparatus according to claim 447, wherein 
said means for conducting a superconducting current can be 
made according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 469 of 575 



CLAIM 461 

CLAIM 461 recites: 

CLAIM 461 An apparatus according to claim 448, wherein 
said means for conducting a superconducting current can be 
made according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants 1 teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 470 of 575 



CLAIM 462 

CLAIM 462 recites: 

CLAIM 462 An apparatus according to claim 449, wherein 
said means for conducting a superconducting current can be 
made according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 471 of 575 



CLAIM 463 



CLAIM 463 recites: 

CLAIM 463 An apparatus according to claim 450, wherein 
said means for conducting a superconducting current can be 
made according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 472 of 575 



CLAIM 464 



CLAIM 464 recites: 

CLAIM 464 An apparatus according to claim 451 , wherein 
said means for conducting a superconducting current can be 
made according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 473 of 575 




CLAIM 465 

CLAIM 465 recites: 

CLAIM 465 An apparatus according to claim 452, wherein 
said means for conducting a superconducting current can be 
made according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 474 of 575 



CLAIM 466 



CLAIM 466 recites: 

CLAIM 466 An apparatus comprising: 

a superconductive current carrying element comprising a Tc 
£26K 

said superconductive current carrying element comprises a 
property selected from one or more of the group consisting 
of a mixed valent oxide, a transition metal, a mixed valent 
transition metal, a perovskite structure, a oerovskite-like 
structure, a perovskite related structure, a layered structure, 
a stoichiomeric or nonstoichiomeric oxygen contents and a 
dopant . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 475 of 575 




This claim is in means plus function form and under In re Donaldson 29 USPQ 
2d1845 (Fed. Cir. 1994) should be allowed since the Examiner has allowed 
claims to the specific examples described in Applicants' specification which 
corresponds to all of the allowed claims. 



Volume 3 



Page 476 of 575 



CLAIM 467 



CLAIM 467 recites: 

CLAIM 467 An apparatus according to claim 466, wherein 
said superconductive current carrying element is at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26K . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 477 of 575 




CLAIM 468 

CLAIM 468 recites: 

CLAIM 468 An apparatus according to claim 466, further 
including a temperature controller for maintaining said 
superconductive current carrying element at a temperature 
less than said Tc . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 478 of 575 



CLAIM 469 

CLAIM 469 recites: 

CLAIM 469 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
466, 467 or 468, wherein said superconductive current 
carrying element comprises one or more of the group 
consisting of Be. Mo. Ca. Sr. Ba. Ra. Sc. Y. La. Ce. Pr. Nd. 
Pm. Sm. Eu. Gd. Tb. Dv. Ho. Er. Tm. Yb and Lu . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 479 of 575 



CLAIM 470 



CLAIM 470 recites: 

CLAIM 470 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
466, 467 or 468, wherein said superconductive current 
carrying element comprises one or more of Be. Ma. Ca. Sr. 
Ba and Ra and one or more of Sc. Y. La. Ce. Pr. Nd. Pm. 
Sm. Eu. Gd. Tb. Dv. Ho. Er. Tm. Yb and Lu. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 480 of 575 




CLAIM 471 

CLAIM 471 recites: 

CLAIM 471 An apparatus according to claim 469, wherein 
said superconductive current carrying element comprises a 
transition metal . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 481 of 575 



CLAIM 472 



CLAIM 472 recites: 

CLAIM 472 An apparatus according to claim 470, wherein 
said superconductive current carrying element comprises a 
transition metal . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 482 of 575 





CLAIM 473 



CLAIM 473 recites: 



CLAIM 473 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
466, 467, or 468, wherein said superconducting current 
carrying element can be made according to known principles 
of ceramic science. 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 483 of 575 



CLAIM 474 



CLAIM 474 recites: 

CLAIM 474 An apparatus according to of claim 471 , 
wherein said superconducting current carrying element can 
be made according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 484 of 575 



CLAIM 475 



CLAIM 475 recites: 

CLAIM 475 An apparatus according to of claim 472, 
wherein said superconducting current carrying element can 
be made according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 485 of 575 



CLAIM 476 

CLAIM 476 recites: 

CLAIM 476 An apparatus comprising: 

a superconductive current carrying element comprising a Tc 
£26K 

said superconductive current carrying element comprises an 
oxide, a layered perovskite structure or a layered oerovskite- 
like structure and comprises a stoichiomeric or 
nonstoichiomeric oxygen content . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 486 of 575 



CLAIM 477 



CLAIM 477 recites: 

CLAIM 477 An apparatus according to claim 476, wherein 
said superconductive current carrying element is at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26 K . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 487 of 575 



CLAIM 478 



CLAIM 478 recites: 

CLAIM 478 An apparatus according to claim 476, further 
including a temperature controller for maintaining said 
superconductive current carrying element at a temperature 
less than said Tc . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 488 of 575 



CLAIM 479 



CLAIM 479 recites: 

CLAIM 479 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
476, 477 or 478, wherein said superconductive current 
carrying element comprises one or more of the group 
consisting of Be. Mo. Ca. Sr. Ba. Ra. Sc. Y. La. Ce. Pr. Nd. 
Pm. Sm. Eu. Gd. Tb. Dv. Ho. Er. Tm. Yb and Lu . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 489 of 575 



CLAIM 480 



CLAIM 480 recites: 

CLAIM 480 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
476, 477 or 478, wherein said superconductive current 
carrying element comprises one or more of Be. Ma. Ca. Sr. 
Ba and Ra and one or more of Sc. Y. La. Ce. Pr, Nd. Pm. 
Sm, Eu. Gd. Tb. Dv. Ho. Er. Tm. Yb and Lu . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 490 of 575 




CLAIM 481 

CLAIM 481 recites: 

CLAIM 481 An apparatus according to claim 479, wherein 
said superconductive current carrying element comprises a 
transition metal . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants 1 evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 491 of 575 



CLAIM 482 



CLAIM 482 recites: 

CLAIM 482 An apparatus according to claim 480, wherein 
said superconductive current carrying element comprises a 
transition metal . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 492 of 575 



CLAIM 483 



CLAIM 483 recites: 

CLAIM 483 An apparatus according to claim 476, wherein 
said superconductive current carrying element comprises 
copper oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 493 of 575 



CLAIM 484 



CLAIM 484 recites: 

CLAIM 484 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
476, 477 or 478, wherein said superconductive current 
carrying element can be made according to known principles 
of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 494 of 575 



CLAIM 485 

CLAIM 485 recites: 

CLAIM 485 An apparatus according to claim 479, wherein 
said superconductive current carrying element can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 495 of 575 



CLAIM 486 



CLAIM 486 recites: 

CLAIM 486 An apparatus according to claim 480, wherein 
said superconductive current carrying element can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 496 of 575 



# 



CLAIM 487 

CLAIM 487 recites: 

CLAIM 487 An apparatus according to claim 481 , wherein 
said superconductive current carrying element can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 497 of 575 



CLAIM 488 

CLAIM 488 recites: 

CLAIM 488 An apparatus according to claim 482, wherein 
said superconductive current carrying element can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 498 of 575 




CLAIM 489 

CLAIM 489 recites: 

CLAIM 489 An apparatus according to claim 483, wherein 
said superconductive current carrying element can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 499 of 575 




CLAIM 490 

CLAIM 490 recites: 

CLAIM 490 An apparatus according to claim 484, wherein 
said superconductive current carrying element can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 500 of 575 



CLAIM 491 

CLAIM 491 recites: 

CLAIM 491 An apparatus according to claim 485, wherein 
said superconductive current carrying element can be made 
according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 501 of 575 



• 



CLAIM 492 

CLAIM 492 recites: 

CLAIM 492 The superconducting apparatus of claim 361 , 
where said phase is crystalline with a structure comprising a 
perovskite related structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 502 of 575 



CLAIM 493 



CLAIM 493 recites: 

CLAIM 493 The superconducting apparatus of claim 362, 
where said phase is crystalline with a structure comprising a 
perovskite related structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 503 of 575 



CLAIM 494 



CLAIM 494 recites: 

CLAIM 494 The combination of claim 12, where said 
composition includes a superconducting phase comprising a 
perovskite related structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 504 of 575 



CLAIM 495 



CLAIM 495 recites: 

CLAIM 495 The combination of claim 379, wherein said 
crystalline structure comprises a oerovskite related structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 505 of 575 



CLAIM 496 



CLAIM 496 recites: 

CLAIM 496 A superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition comprising a 
copper-oxide compound having a crystal structure 
comprising a perovskite related structure and a layered 
characteristic , the composition having a superconductor 
transition temperature Tc of greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition 
temperature Tc of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source for causing an electric current to flow in 
the superconductor element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 



Volume 3 



Page 506 of 575 



Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 507 of 575 




CLAIM 497 

CLAIM 497 recites: 

CLAIM 497 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
compositio n, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the copper-oxide compound 
including at least one rare-earth or element comprising a 
rare earth characteristic and at least one alkaline-earth 
element, the composition having a superconductive/resistive 
transition defining a superconductive/resistive-transition 
temperature range between an upper limit defined by a 
transition-onset temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by 
an effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T q=0 , 
the transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or 
equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T q=0 of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source for causing an electric current to flow in 
the superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 508 of 575 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 509 of 575 




CLAIM 498 

CLAIM 498 recites: 

CLAIM 498 A superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric current flow in a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure , the composition having a 
superconductor transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and 
below the superconductor transition temperature Tc of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) causing an electric current to flow in the superconductor 
element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 



Volume 3 



Page 510 of 575 




Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 51 1 of 575 




CLAIM 499 

CLAIM 499 recites: 

CLAIM 499 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the copper-oxide compound 
including at least one rare-earth or rare-earth-like element 
and at least one alkaline-earth element, the composition 
having a superconductive/resistive-transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 , the transition- 
onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- 
resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 of the superconductive 
composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 512 of 575 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 513 of 575 



CLAIM 500 



CLAIM 500 recites: 

CLAIM 500 An apparatus for causing electric-current flow in 
a superconductive state at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure , the composition having a 
superconductive transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K, said superconductive composition includes at 
least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
Group II A element, a rare earth element; and a Group III 6 
element; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and 
below the superconductor transition temperature Tc of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 



Volume 3 



Page 514 of 575 




those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 515 of 575 




CLAIM 501 

CLAIM 501 recites: 

CLAIM 501 An apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the copper-oxide compound 
including at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a Group II A element, a rare earth element and 
a Group III B element the composition having a 
superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 , the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- 
resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 of the superconductive 
composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 516 of 575 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 517 of 575 




CLAIM 502 



Claim 502 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 502 A superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the composition having a 
superconductive transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K, said superconductive composition includes at 
least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
Group II A element and at least one element selected from 
the group consisting of a rare earth element and a Group III 
B element; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and 
below the superconductor transition temperature Tc of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 518 of 575 




CLAIM 503 



Claim 503 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 503 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the copper-oxide compound 
including at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a Group II A element and at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a rare earth element 
and a Group III B element, the composition having a 
superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive-resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p= o , the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- 
resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 of the superconductive 
composition; and 



Volume 3 



Page 519 of 575 



(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

CLAIM 504 

Claim 504 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 504 A superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a transition metal oxide compound comprising 
a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the composition having a 
superconductive transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K, said superconductive composition includes an 
element selected from the group consisting of a Group II A 
element and at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a rare earth element and a Group III B element; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and 
below the superconductor transition Tc of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 520 of 575 



CLAIM 505 



Claim 505 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 505 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a transition metal-oxide compound comprising 
a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the transition metal-oxide 
compound including at least one element selected from the 
group consisting of a Group II A element and at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of a rare earth 
element and a Group III B element, the composition having a 
superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 , the transition- 
onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- 
resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 of the superconductive 
composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 521 of 575 




CLAIM 506 



Claim 506 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 506 A superconductive apparatus for causing 
electric-current flow in a superconductive state at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the composition having a 
superconductive transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K, said superconductive composition includes a 
Group II A element, and at least one element selected from 
the group consisting of a rare earth element and a Group III 
B element; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K and 
below the superconductor transition temperature Tc of the 
superconductive composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 522 of 575 



CLAIM 507 



Claim 507 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 507 A superconductive apparatus for conducting an 
electric current essentially without resistive losses, 
comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the copper-oxide compound 
including Group II A element, and at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a rare earth element 
and a Group III B element, the composition having a 
superconductive-resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller maintaining the superconductor 
element at a temperature below the effectively-zero-bulk- 
resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of the superconductive 
composition; and 

(c) a current source causing an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 523 of 575 



CLAIM 508 



CLAIM 508 recites: 

CLAIM 508 An apparatus capable of carrying electric 
current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure , the composition comprising a 
superconductor transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition 
temperature Tc of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 



Volume 3 



Page 524 of 575 



Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 525 of 575 



CLAIM 509 



CLAIM 508 recites: 

CLAIM 509 An apparatus capable of carrying an electric- 
current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
compositio n, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure , the composition comprising a 
superconductive transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K, said superconductive composition includes at 
least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
Group II A element, a rare earth element: and a Group III B 
element : 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition 
temperature Tc of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 



Volume 3 



Page 526 of 575 



those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 527 of 575 




CLAIM 510 

CLAIM 510 recites: 

CLAIM 510 An apparatus capable of carrying an electric 
current essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the copper-oxide compound 
including at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a Group II A element, a rare earth element and 
a Group III B element , the composition comprising a 
superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 , the transition- 
onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 528 of 575 




The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 529 of 575 



CLAIM 511 



Claim 51 1 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 51 1 An apparatus capable of carrying an electric- 
current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the composition comprising a 
superconductive transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K, said superconductive composition includes at 
least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
Group II A element and at least one element selected from 
the group consisting of a rare earth element and a Group III 
B element; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition 
temperature Tc of the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 530 of 575 



CLAIM 512 



Claim 512 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 512 An apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the copper-oxide compound 
including at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a Group II A element and at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a rare earth element 
and a Group III B element, the composition comprising a 
superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive-resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 , the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 531 of 575 




CLAIM 513 



Claim 513 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 513 An apparatus capable of carrying an electric- 
current flow in a superconductive state at a temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a transition metal oxide compound comprising 
a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the composition comprising a 
superconductive transition temperature Tc of greater than or 
equal to 26°K, said superconductive composition includes at 
least one element selected from the group consisting of a 
Group II A element and at least one element selected from 
the group consisting of a rare earth element and a Group III 
B element; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature greater than or 
equal to 26°K and below the superconductor transition Tc of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 532 of 575 





CLAIM 514 



Claim 514 which is allowed recites: 



CLAIM 514 An apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a transition metal-oxide compound comprising 
a crystal structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the transition metal-oxide 
compound including at least one element selected from the 
group consisting of a Group II A element and at least one 
element selected from the group consisting of a rare earth 
element and a Group 1MB element, the composition 
comprising a superconductive/resistive transition defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0, the 
transition-onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal 
to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature Tp=0 of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 533 of 575 




CLAIM 515 

Claim 515 which is allowed recites: 

CLAIM 515 An apparatus for conducting an electric current 
essentially without resistive losses, comprising: 

(a) a superconductor element made of a superconductive 
composition, the superconductive composition consisting 
essentially of a copper-oxide compound comprising a crystal 
structure comprising a layered characteristic and a 
perovskite related structure, the copper-oxide compound 
including at least one element selected from the group 
consisting of a group II A element, at least one element 
selected from the group consisting of a rare earth element 
and at least one element selected from the group consisting 
of a Group NIB element, the composition comprising a 
superconductive-resistive transition temperature defining a 
superconductive/resistive-transition temperature range 
between an upper limit defined by a transition-onset 
temperature Tc and a lower limit defined by an effectively- 
zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 , the transition- 
onset temperature Tc being greater than or equal to 26°K; 

(b) a temperature controller for maintaining the 
superconductor element at a temperature below the 
effectively-zero-bulk-resistivity intercept temperature T p=0 of 
the superconductive composition; and 

(c) a source of an electric current to flow in the 
superconductor element. 



Volume 3 



Page 534 of 575 



CLAIM 516 



CLAIM 516 recites: 

CLAIM 51 6 An apparatus of claim 146 wherein said means 
for carrying a superconductive current is comprised of an 
oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 535 of 575 



CLAIM 517 



CLAIM 517 recites: 

CLAIM 517 An apparatus comprising: 

a superconductive current carrying element comprising a Tc 
*26K 

said superconductive current carrying element comprises a 
metallic, oxvaen-deficient. perovskite-like. mixed valent 
copper compound . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 536 of 575 



CLAIM 518 



CLAIM 518 recites: 

CLAIM 518 An apparatus according to claim 51 7, wherein 
said superconductive current carrying element is at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26K . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 537 of 575 



CLAIM 519 



CLAIM 519 recites: 

CLAIM 519 An apparatus according to claim 517, further 
including a temperature controller for maintaining said 
superconductive current carrying element at a temperature 
less than said Tc . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 538 of 575 



CLAIM 520 



CLAIM 520 recites: 

CLAIM 520 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
517, 518 or 519, wherein said superconductive current 
carrying element comprises one or more of the group 
consisting of Be. Mo. Ca. Sr. Ba. Ra, Sc. Y, La. Ce. Pr. Nd. 
Pm. Sm. Eu. Gd. Tb. Dv, Ho Er, Tm. Yb and Lu . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 539 of 575 



CLAIM 521 



CLAIM 521 recites: 

CLAIM 521 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
51 7, 51 8 or 51 9, wherein said superconductive current 
carrying element comprises one or more of Be. Ma. Ca. Sr. 
Ba and Ra and one or more of Sc. Y. La. Ce. Pr. Nd. Pm. 
Sm. Eu Gd. Tb. Dv. Ho. Er. Tm. Yb and Lu . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 540 of 575 



CLAIM 522 

CLAIM 522 recites: 

CLAIM 522 An apparatus comprising: 

a superconductive current carrying element comprising a Tc 
2>26K 

said superconductive current carrying element comprises a 
composition that can be made according to known principles 
of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants 1 evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 

"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 

a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 



Volume 3 



Page 541 of 575 




cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 542 of 575 



CLAIM 523 



CLAIM 523 recites: 

CLAIM 523 An apparatus according to claim 522, wherein 
said superconductive current carrying element is at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26K . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 543 of 575 



CLAIM 524 



CLAIM 524 recites: 

CLAIM 524 An apparatus according to claim 523, further 
including a temperature controller for maintaining said 
superconductive current carrying element at a temperature 
less than said Tc . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 544 of 575 




CLAIM 525 

CLAIM 525 recites: 

CLAIM 525 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
522, 523 or 524, wherein said superconductive current 
carrying element comprises one or more of the group 
consisting of Be. Mo. Ca. Sr. Ba. Ra. Sc. Y. La. Ce. Pr. Nd. 
Pm. Sm. Eu. Gd. Tb. Dv. Ho. Er. Tm. Yb and Lu . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 545 of 575 



CLAIM 526 



CLAIM 526 recites: 

CLAIM 526 An apparatus according to anyone of 
claims 522, 523 or 524, wherein said superconductive 
current carrying element comprises one or more of 
Be. Ma. Ca. Sr. Ba and Ra and one or more of Sc. Y. 
La. Ce. Pr. Nd. Pm. Sm. Eu. Gd. Tb. Dv. Ho. Er. Tm. 
Yb and Lu . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 546 of 575 



CLAIM 527 



CLAIM 527 recites: 

CLAIM 527 An apparatus according to claim 525, wherein 
said superconductive current carrying element comprises a 
transition metal . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 547 of 575 



CLAIM 528 



CLAIM 528 recites: 

CLAIM 528 An apparatus according to claim 526, wherein 
said superconductive current carrying element comprises a 
transition metal . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 548 of 575 



CLAIM 529 



CLAIM 529 recites: 

CLAIM 529 An apparatus according to claim 522, wherein 
said superconductive current carrying element comprises 
copper oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 549 of 575 



CLAIM 530 



CLAIM 530 recites: 

CLAIM 530 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
522, 523 or 524, wherein said superconductive current 
carrying element is substantially oerovskite . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 550 of 575 



# 



CLAIM 531 

CLAIM 531 recites: 

CLAIM 531 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
522, 523 or 524, wherein said superconductive current 
carrying element comprises a perovskite-like structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 551 of 575 




CLAIM 532 

CLAIM 532 recites: 

CLAIM 532 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
522, 523 or 524, wherein said superconductive current 
carrying element comprises a perovskite related structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 552 of 575 



CLAIM 533 

CLAIM 533 recites: 

CLAIM 533 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
522, 523 or 524, wherein said superconductive current 
carrying element comprises a nonstoichiometric amount of 
oxygen . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 553 of 575 



CLAIM 534 



CLAIM 534 recites: 

CLAIM 534 An apparatus according to anyone of claims 
522, 523 or 524, wherein said superconductive current 
carrying element comprises a layered structure . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 554 of 575 




CLAIM 535 

CLAIM 535 recites: 

CLAIM 535 An apparatus comprising a superconductor 
exhibiting a superconducting onset at an onset temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K, said superconductor being 
comprised of at least four elements, none of which is a 
means for carrying a superconducting current at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K .a temperature 
controller for maintaining said superconductor at an 
operating temperature in excess of said onset temperature 
to maintain said superconductor in a superconducting state 
and a current source for passing current through said 
superconductor while in said superconducting state. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 555 of 575 




CLAIM 536 

CLAIM 536 recites: 

CLAIM 536 An apparatus comprising: 

a means for carrying a superconductive current exhibiting a 
superconductive state at a temperature greater than or eoual 
to 26°K, 

a cooler for cooling said composition to a temperature 
greater than or equal to 26°K at which temperature said 
means for carrying a superconductive current exhibits said 
superconductive state, and 

a current source for passing an electrical current through 
said composition while said composition is in said 
superconductive state. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 



Volume 3 



Page 556 of 575 



Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

This claim is in means plus function form and under In re Donaldson 29 USPQ 
2d1845 (Fed. Cir. 1994) should be allowed since the Examiner has allowed 
claims to the specific examples described in Applicants' specification which 
corresponds to all of the allowed claims. The Examiner provides no reason for 
not following In re Donaldson. 



Volume 3 



Page 557 of 575 



• 



CLAIM 537 

CLAIM 537 recites: 

CLAIM 537 An apparatus comprising: 

a metallic, oxvaen-deficient. perovskite-like. mixed valent 
transition metal composition exhibiting a superconductive 
state at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K, 

a temperature controller maintaining said composition at a 
temperature greater than or equal to 26°K at which 
temperature said composition exhibits said superconductive 
state, and 

a current source passing an electrical current through said 
composition while said composition is in said 
superconductive state. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 



Volume 3 



Page 558 of 575 




Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 559 of 575 



CLAIM 538 

CLAIM 538 recites: 

CLAIM 538 The apparatus of claim 537, where said means 
for carrying a superconductive current is comprised of a 
metal oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 560 of 575 




CLAIM 539 

CLAIM 539 recites: 

CLAIM 539 The apparatus of claim 537, where said means 
for carrying a superconductive current is comprised of a 
transition metal oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 561 of 575 




CLAIM 540 

CLAIM 540 recites: 

CLAIM 540 An apparatus comprising: 

a composition comprising oxvaen exhibiting a 
superconductive state at a temperature greater than or eoual 
to 26°K, a temperature controller for maintaining said 
composition at a temperature greater than or equal to 26°K 
at which temperature said composition exhibits said 
superconductive state, and 

a source of an electrical current through said composition 
while said composition is in said superconductive state. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 562 of 575 



CLAIM 541 



CLAIM 541 recites: 

CLAIM 541 An apparatus according to claim 540, where 
said composition is comprised of a metal oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 563 of 575 



CLAIM 542 



CLAIM 542 recites: 

CLAIM 542 An apparatus according to claim 541 , where 
said composition is comprised of a transition metal oxide . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 564 of 575 



CLAIM 543 



CLAIM 543 recites: 

CLAIM 543 A combination, comprising: 

an oxygen containing composition exhibiting the onset of a 
DC substantially zero resistance state at an onset 
temperature in excess of 30°K . and 

a current source for passing an electrical current through 
said composition while it is in said substantially zero 
resistance state. 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 



Volume 3 



Page 565 of 575 




CLAIMS 544 TO 550 WERE ADDED BY THE TWELFTH SUPPLEMENTARY 



RESPONSE WHICH WAS NOT ENETERED WHEN THIS APPEAL BRIEF 



WAS FILED 



CLAIM 544 



CLAIM 544 recites: 



CLAIM 544 (NEW) An apparatus according to claim 535, wherein 
said superconductor can be made according to known principles of 



ceramic science. 



The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 

enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 

cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 

experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 

those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 

shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 

within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of j 

Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement j 

Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 

Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 

Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 

particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 

Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 

i 

includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim j 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 

"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 

a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that j 

cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for \ 

example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 



Volume 3 



Page 566 of 575 



j 



converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 567 of 575 



CLAIM 545 

CLAIM 545 recites: 

CLAIM 545 (NEW) An apparatus according to claim 536, 
wherein said means for carrying a superconductive current can 
be made according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the underlined limitation of the claim which 
includes specific limitations on the scope of this claim. 

The sentenced bridging page 1 and 2 of the specification states 
"Generally, superconductivity is considered to be a property of the metallic state of 
a material since all known superconductors are metallic under the conditions that 
cause them to be superconducting. A few normally non-metallic materials, for 
example, become superconducting under very high pressure wherein the pressure 
converts them to metals before they exhibit superconducting behavior." Applicants 
discovered that ceramic materials are superconductors. 



Volume 3 



Page 568 of 575 




CLAIM 546 

CLAIM 546 recites: 

CLAIM 546 (NEW) An apparatus according to any one of 
claims 537, 538 or 539 wherein said composition can be 
made according to known principles of ceramic science . 

The Examiner has given no specific reasons for rejecting this claim as not 
enabled. The Examiner has not shown why a person of ordinary skill in the art 
cannot, based on Applicants' teaching, determine without undue 
experimentation, species that came within the scope of this claim other than 
those that the Examiner has expressly stated are enabled. Applicants have 
shown extensive evidence that persons of skill in the art can determine species 
within the scope of this claim without undue experimentation. Examples of 
Applicants' evidence are: the Examiner's First, Second and Third Enablement 
Statements, the Poole 1988, 1995 and 1996 Enablement Statements, the 
Schuller Enablement Statement and Applicants' Affidavits of Mitzi, Dinger, Tsuei, 
Shaw, Duncombe, Newns and Bednorz in Brief Attachments AH to AR. In 
particular the Examiner has given no reason for why this claim is not enabled by 
Applicants' teaching in view of the un