Appeal No. 1995-2781
Application No. 07/804,868
claim 1. The Examiner indicated it would have been obvious to
one skilled in the art to modify the aqueous developable
chromogenic photographic dye-diffusion transfer element as
described in the patent claim 1 by removing the dispersion aid
because Chari teaches that the formation of solvent
dispersions by mechanical means was known to those skilled in
the art. (Examiner’s Answer, page 8, second full paragraph).
Appellants urge there is no motivation to use the
solvents of Chari and the solvents of Chari and Texter
(patent) are not equivalent. (Reply Brief, page 17, second
full paragraph to page 18, line 2). Chari describes
photographic systems which contain solvent dispersions
including dispersion aids. One of ordinary skill in the art
would have recognized that solvent dispersions including
dispersion aids could be formed from any of Chari’s disclosed
solvents. Included in the described suitable solvents are
compounds which Appellants admit read on the instant claims.
(Reply Brief, page 17, last paragraph). Consequently, a
person of ordinary skill in the art who did not want to employ
mechanical means to form a dispersion would have used a
dispersion aid as described in Chari.
16
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007