Appeal No. 95-3765
Application No. 08/084,388
According to appellant, the invention is a metal soap
pellet which has a metal soap and a binder, with the binder
having at least two components that will react under heat
and/or pressure to form additional metal soap (brief, pages 1
and 2). Claim 1 is illustrative of the subject matter on
appeal and is reproduced below:
1. A metal soap pellet comprising (a) a metal soap and (b) a
binder comprising a plurality of components which are capable
of reacting together under heat and/or pressure to form a
metal soap.
The examiner relies upon the following references as
evidence of obviousness:
Rieber et al. (Rieber) 4,235,794 Nov. 25, 1980
Hirsch et al. (Hirsch) 4,927,548 May 22, 1990
Dunski 5,028,486 Jul. 2, 1991
Claims 1 through 28 stand finally rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Rieber or Dunski or,
alternatively, over Dunski and Hirsch (answer, page 3). We
reverse all the stated rejections for reasons which follow.
OPINION
A. The Rejections over Rieber or Dunski
The metal soap pellet of appealed claim 1 requires (a) a
metal soap and (b) a binder with a plurality of components
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007