Appeal No. 95-0331
Application No. 07/626,904
As indicated earlier, the artisan would have been motivated to
combine these prior art teachings in order to obtain the
advantages taught by Drahnak to attend use of his catalyst as
well as the advantages taught by Eckberg to attend use of a
photoinitiator and catalyst together in the hydrosilation
reactions under consideration. Further, the artisan would
have had a reasonable expectation of successfully effecting
such reactions using Drahnak’s catalyst in light of patentee’s
explicit teachings with respect thereto and using the specific
photoinitiators of McDowell or Gruber in light of Eckberg’s
teachings of employing photoinitiators generally in
combination with platinum catalysts to effect hydrosilation
reactions. O’Farrell, Id.
In addition to the unpersuasive arguments previously
addressed, the appellants argue that the teachings of Drahnak
and Eckberg are in conflict and thus not combinable.
Specifically, the appellants point out that “the composition
of Eckberg would be expected to react prematurely at room
temperature because of the nature of the precious metal or
precious metal-containing catalyst that Eckberg utilizes”
whereas “[t]he catalyst of Drahnak ... would not be expected
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007