Appeal 2007-0107
Application 10/013,885
following the teachings of Hardy or Susi in selecting a compound that is
effective in protecting against the effects of ultraviolet light. Furthermore,
the determination of obviousness is bolstered by the fact that the claimed
compound is used for substantially the same purpose (UV protection) as
taught by Hardy and Susi.
In this regard, Hardy, for example, teaches that X, Y and Z could be
phenyl radicals with X being substituted with an hydroxyl group ortho to the
point of attachment to the triazine nucleus and that constituents (R-R8) could
be, inter alia, hydrogen or an acylamino group (col. 1, l. 56 – col. 2, l. 9).
Moreover, the disclosed examples and particularly preferred embodiments of
Hardy or Susi (for example, Formula II of Hardy) do not constitute a
teaching away from a broader disclosure of less preferred embodiments. See
In re Susi, 440 F.2d 442, 446, 169 USPQ 423, 426 (CCPA 1971). After all,
it cannot be overemphasized that a reference must be considered in its
entirety and that the disclosure of a reference is not limited to specific
working examples contained therein. See In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792,
794 n.1, 215 USPQ 569, 570 n.1 (CCPA 1982); In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d
747, 750, 192 USPQ 278, 280 (CCPA 1976).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill
in the art at the time of the invention to determine, through nothing more
than routine experimentation, the workable structures of the triazine
compound of the general formulas of Hardy or Susi in order to protect
against the effects of ultraviolet light and in so doing arrive at UV protective
compounds encompassed by the compound formulas used in the preparation
or composition of representative claim 1.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013