Appeal No. 94-2999
Application 07/672,286
alcohol which includes a step of sterilizing a fermentation
vessel. The aforementioned sterilization is effected via an
alcohol in aqueous solution obtained from a distillation or
purification facility associated with the method/process. This
appealed subject matter is adequately illustrated by independent
claims 8 and 25, a copy of which taken from the appellant’s brief
is appended to this decision.
The references relied upon by the examiner as evidence of
obviousness are:
Heden 3,997,400 Dec. 14, 1976
Feldman et al. (Feldman) 4,431,838 Feb. 14, 1984
Tegtmeier 4,845,033 Jul. 4, 1989
Harandi et al. (Harandi) 5,167,937 Dec. 1, 1992
Claims 8 through 28 are rejected under the first paragraph
of 35 U.S.C. § 112 for failing to comply with the written
description requirement set forth in this paragraph. It is the
examiner’s basic position that the appealed claims are rendered
in violation of the written description requirement by virtue of
the claim term “only” because “[t]he specification does not
specifically set forth that alcohol should be the “only”
sterilant used and that no other sterilant can be used” (answer,
page 2).
Claims 8 through 28 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being obvious over Tegtmeier in view of Heden and either
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007