Appeal No. 97-3290
Application 08/465,896
based upon a specification which fails to enable the breadth
of the claim in that certain surfactants within the claimed
range would render the claimed disposable absorbent product
inoperative (not be effective to reduce odor). From the
examiner’s standpoint, appellant’s “Odor Perception Test” is
subjective, and does not establish a standard by which the
amount of odor can be measured. Appellant, on the other hand,
argues (brief, page 3) that, notwithstanding that certain
surfactants having a HLB less than 12 are not suitable for use
in the present invention (specification, page 8, line 33 to
page 9, line 7), such
surfactants are excluded from the claimed invention since such
surfactants would not be effective in reducing the odor of
urine.
The circumstance that appellant discloses surfactants
having a hydrophilic/lipophilic balance less than about 12, as
claimed, and which are unsuitable for use in the present
invention, does not per se render the claimed invention
unpatentable based upon 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph. Each
case must be assessed on its own facts. See In re Angstadt,
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007