Appeal No. 2004-0149
Application No. 09/803,612
scope of the bleaching composition recited in the claimed method.
See In re Kerkhoven, 626 F.2d 846, 850, 205 USPQ 1069, 1072 (CCPA
1980).
For the foregoing reasons and those set forth in the Answer,
we determine that the examiner has established a prima facie case
of obviousness in view of the reference evidence. Based on the
totality of the record, including due consideration of appellants’
arguments, we determine that the preponderance of evidence weighs
most heavily in favor of obviousness within the meaning of section
103(a). Accordingly, we affirm the examiner’s rejections of claims
1, 2, 6-14 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over WO ‘628 or WO ‘787.
B. The Rejection over Appel
The examiner finds that Appel discloses a bleach catalyst
comprising an organic ligand complexed with a transition metal
within the scope of the claimed bleach catalyst (Paper No. 4, pages
9-10). The examiner further finds that Appel teaches using this
catalyst to bleach laundry fabrics with atmospheric oxygen which
comprises contacting the stained fabrics in an aqueous medium with
the bleaching composition, which is substantially devoid of
peroxygen bleach or a peroxy-based or -generating bleach system
(id.). The examiner further finds that the disclosure of “laundry”
by Appel encompasses the fabric having “fadeable dyes” recited in
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007