Appeal No. 2003-0715
Application No. 09/873,806
scientists or artisans to improve upon what is generally known
provides the motivation to determine where in a disclosed set of
percentage ranges is the optimum combination of percentages.”);
In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276, 205 USPQ 215, 219 (CCPA
1980)(“[D]iscovery of an optimum value of a result effective
variable in a known process is ordinarily within the skill of
the art.”); In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235
(CCPA 1955)(“[W]here the general conditions of a claim are
disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the
optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.”).
The appellants argue that “[n]o hot water treatment of the
hydrolyzed weak acid resin is taught or suggested” in Nagai.
(Appeal brief, page 4.) We disagree. As pointed out by the
examiner, it is the regenerated resin (Nagai’s column 6, lines
62-66) which is considered to be the hydrogen-form weak acid
cation exchange resin. Once regenerated, one of ordinary skill
in the art would have found it prima facie obvious to pre-treat
the resin (i.e., clean the resin prior to actual use in a water
purification process) with water (e.g., steam) as suggested in
the references.
Relying on the specification description at page 8, lines
1-7, the appellants argue: (appeal brief, page 5)
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007