Appeal No. 94-1545
Application 07/939,990
Claim 2 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, fourth
paragraph. Appellant concedes that this rejection is proper
(Appeal Brief, page 4). Therefore, we affirm the examiner's
rejection of Claim 2 under § 112.
Claims 1-7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as
anticipated by Ghebre-Sellassie et al. (Ghebre-Sellassie),
U.S. 4,814,354, patented March 21, 1989. For the rejection under
this section, all claims stand or fall together (Appeal Brief,
page 4). We reverse the examiner's rejection of Claims 1-7 under
§ 102.
Discussion
Claim 1 is representative of the claimed subject matter and
reads:
1. A salt comprising the reaction product of
nicotinic acid and a basic anion exchange resin
having a degree of crosslinking with
divinylbenzene of less than about 4%, a maximum
degree of crosslinking corresponding to a minimum
moisture content of 50%, and a particle size in
water in a swollen, chloride form ranging from
about 0.03 to about 0.84 mm.
To sustain an examiner's rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102,
a prior art reference must itself sufficiently describe the
claimed invention to have placed a person having ordinary skill
in the art in possession of it. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 708,
15 USPQ2d 1655, 1657 (Fed. Cir. 1990). We hold that the examiner
clearly erred in finding that Ghebre-Sellassie placed the
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007