Appeal No. 1996-2738
Application 08/252,501
recites adding a cationic polysaccharide derivative having at
least two cationic moieties bonded to each derivatized
saccharide monomer to a paper stock at any time during
manufacture. Claim 25 further recites that the cationic
polysaccharide derivative has “been prepared by reacting a
substantially non-crosslinked polysaccharide with a
polycationic reagent having a single polysaccharide reactive
group and at least two cationic groups”. Therefore this claim
recites a method for making paper which comprises adding a
“product-by-process” (the cationic polysaccharide derivative).
Accordingly, with regard to the product-by-process limitation
recited in claim 25 on appeal, where the examiner reasonably
believes that the prior art discloses a product that appears
to be either identical or only slightly different from the
product claimed, a rejection under § 102 or § 103 is proper.
In re Fitzgerald, 619 F.2d 67, 70, 205 USPQ 594, 596 (CCPA
1980); In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433-34
(CCPA 1977). Compare In re Hirao, 535 F.2d 67, 190 USPQ 15
(CCPA 1976). In Hirao, applicants specifically recited the
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007