Appeal 2006-2350
Application 10/444,104
a calcium compound selected from the group consisting of CaCl2,
CaCO3, CaSO4, CaBr2, and CaO,
wherein the slurry is redispersible after remaining in a static state for a
period of greater than about 24 hours.
The Examiner relies on the following prior art references to show
unpatentability:
Uchino (Uchino 978) US 2004/0010978 A1 Jan. 22, 2004
Uchino (Uchino 206) US 2004/0031206 A1 Feb. 19, 2004
The Examiner maintains the following rejections:
1. Claim 20 is rejected under the written description requirement of
35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 1.
2. Claims 19, 20, and 23-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Uchino 978.1
3. Claims 19, 20, and 23-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Uchino 206.2
We find that the Examiner failed to establish a prima facie case of
lack of written descriptive support under 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 1 for the subject
matter of claim 20. We further conclude that the Examiner failed to
establish a prima facie case of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over
Uchino 206 with regard to claims 19, 20, and 23-38, i.e., all the claims so
rejected, or a prima facie case of obviousness over Uchino 978 with regard
to separately argued claim 29. We, however, conclude that the Examiner did
establish a prima facie case of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over
Uchino 978 with regard to claims 19, 20, 23, 28, and 30-38. We, therefore,
affirm-in-part the decision of the Examiner. Our reasons follow.
1 Appellants refer to Uchino 978 as Uchino-1.
2 Appellants refer to Uchino 206 as Uchino-2.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013