Appeal No. 1998-1672
Application No. 08/708,163
bromide ion at from at least 5 X 10-5 mol/l,
iodide ion at from at least 5 x 10-7 mol/l, and
an organic antioxidant present at from about
0.001 to about 0.5 mol/l, said antioxidant having the
formula:
R-N(OH)-R’
wherein R and R’ are independently hydrogen or
substituted or unsubstituted alkyl of 1 to 10 carbon
atoms or substituted or unsubstituted aryl.
Claims 8-20, 23, 25, 26 and 27 stand rejected as being
unpatentable for novelty and for obviousness under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) and 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Fujimoto.
We have thoroughly reviewed appellant’s arguments for
patentability, and the examiner’s position. For the
reasons discussed below, we will reverse the 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) rejection, but we will affirm the 35 U.S.C. § 103
rejection.
Appellant argues that Fujimoto teaches a broad pH
range of from 9 to 12, but fails to teach this in
combination with the required iodide ion concentration in
the color developer solution. Appellant argues that the
only description of iodide ion in the solution is in
Example 1, but the pH is 10.0, which is above the pH
recited in appellant’s claims.
The examiner rebuts and states that Fujimoto’s
invention is not limited to the examples. We find,
however, that other disclosure in Fujimoto provides for a
pH range from 9 to 12, the amount of bromide or iodide ions
is not specified (other than in the example in column 43).
The examiner has not addressed this issue. When the prior
art discloses a range which touches, overlaps, or is within
the claimed range, but no specific examples falling within
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007