Appeal 2007-2985
Application 010/669,978
1 by Tsao]." Amendment received 16 December 2005, page 10, last
2 paragraph, fourth line.
3 The Tsao invention, while interesting, is not the most relevant
4 information provided by Tsao.
5 Rather, it is Tsao's description of the prior art which surfaces as highly
6 relevant to the claims on appeal.
7 Specifically, we refer to the description by Tsao of drawbacks said
8 to exist in unstabilized hydrogen peroxide solutions. Col. 1:56 through
9 col. 2:7:
10 Hydrogen peroxide in the form of a dilute solution, e.g., about
11 0.5 to 6% by weight in water, is known to be effective for use
12 with contact lenses in order to kill any contaminating
13 microorganisms.
14 One drawback with unstabilized dilute hydrogen
15 peroxide solutions, however, is that without the use of a
16 stabilizer or a combination of stabilizers, the aqueous peroxide
17 solutions characteristically decompose over a period of time.[1]
18 The rate at which such dilute hydrogen peroxide solutions
19 decompose will, of course, be dependent upon such factors as
20 pH and the presence of trace amounts of various metal
21 impurities, such as copper or chromium, which may act to
22 catalytically decompose the same. Moreover, at moderately
1 Any observant purchaser of hydrogen peroxide in a brown bottle from a
drug store to be used to cleanse wounds knows that after a certain amount of
time the hydrogen peroxide decomposes and becomes ineffective.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013