Appeal No. 95-0715
Application 07/936,942
the same range of up to 5 mm in particle size as the feed
supplement granules of Duchstein.
Thus, the combination of Autant and the knowledge in the
art as evinced by Duchstein taken as a whole would clearly
have motivated one of ordinary skill in this art to utilize
the food supplement granules of Autant in the same or similar
particle size as the particle size of the feed with which it
is to be mixed for a particular animal in order to avoid
separation of the components of the mixed feed and to
facilitate the ease of handling the mixed feed with
conventional machinery and techniques. See, e.g., In re
Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425, 208 USPQ 871, 881 (CCPA
1981)(“[T]he test [for obviousness] is what the combined
references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in
the art.”).
Accordingly, the claimed method of feeding nutrients to
animals would have been prima facie obvious as a whole over
Autant combined with Duchstein as a whole to one of ordinary
skill in this art at the time the claimed invention was made,
in the absence of persuasive argument and evidence to the
contrary. We have carefully considered the elements of all of
the appealed claims and the arguments set forth in appellant’s
brief in restating this ground of rejection. With respect to
the appealed claims, we point out that in addition to teaching
adjusting the particle size of the food supplement granule to
the same or similar particle size of the meal for the
particular animal, Autant and Duchstein also provide evidence
that the adjustment of the contents of the granule with
respect to its density relative to the meal, the amount of
granules to be combined with the meal and the nutritional
- 8 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007