Appeal No. 96-2311
Application 08/139,057
about 0.5-20 weight percent, based on the weight of
ingredients in a dry blend insecticide composition"
The rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, is
reversed.
35 U.S.C. § 103
Combining the cited references to meet appellants' claims
requires overcoming two hurdles. In our judgment, the
examiner overcomes the first hurdle, but not the second.
Accordingly, on this record, the examiner does not establish
that the claimed composition and method would have been
obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having
ordinary skill in the art.
We agree that Wellinga constitutes relevant prior art,
and that Wellinga would have led a person having ordinary
skill in the art to an aqueous pesticide formulation
comprising (3) diflu- benzuron, and (4) a surfactant in
relative amounts meeting the terms of the appealed claims.
Wellinga also suggests adding known pesticidal compounds, for
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007