Appeal No. 1995-4810
Application No. 08/011,499
concludes that it would have been obvious to utilize magnesium
hydroxide in lieu of the aluminum hydroxide of the Abstract
since Ohara and Williams teach “the advantages in electrical
arc resistance and tracking resistance to be afforded by such
a variation.” (Answer, page 5).
“When determining the patentability of a claimed
invention which combines two known elements, the question is
whether there is something in the prior art as a whole to
suggest the desirability, and thus the obviousness, of making
the combination. [Internal quotes and citations omitted].” In
re Rouffet, 149 F.3d 1350, 1356, 47 USPQ2d 1453, 1456 (Fed.
Cir. 1998). We determine that the examiner has not
established the desirability, motivation or suggestion for
combining the Abstract with the teachings of the secondary
references to Ohara and Williams. Ohara teaches the improved
arc resistance when using magnesium hydroxide in a PPS
composition (column 1, lines 61-63) while Williams teaches the
improvement in electrical tracking resistance with magnesium
hydroxide in polyamide compositions (page 2). However, the
Abstract relied upon by the examiner as the primary reference
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007