Appeal No. 96-2341
Application 08/389,554
of appellants’ invention in their specification. The
examiner, therefore, used impermissible hindsight when
rejecting the claims. See W.L. Gore & Associates v. Garlock,
Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1553, 220 USPQ 303, 312-13 (Fed. Cir.
1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984); In re Rothermel, 276
F.2d 393, 396, 125 USPQ 328, 331 (CCPA 1960). Accordingly, we
do not sustain the examiner’s rejection over Munro.
Rejection over Munro in view of Baxter
The examiner relies upon Baxter only for suggestion to
use boehmite as Munro’s alumina (answer, pages 5-6). Because
Baxter has not been relied upon for any teaching which would
remedy the deficiency in Munro discussed above, we reverse the
rejection over Munro in view of Baxter.
Rejection over Wilkins
Wilkins discloses a water-soluble stripping composition
which includes, on a weight basis, about 1 to about 50 parts
water, about 1 to about 30 parts peroxide, and about 25 to
about 95 parts of a water-soluble ester containing from 4 to
10 carbon atoms (col. 2, lines 3-13). The composition can
contain cosolvents or diluents and, as a percentage of the
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007