Appeal No. 96-2324
Application No. 08/071,963
the claimed invention. The examiner has not met that burden
here.
The examiner has not established that solid fungicidal
compositions known in the art, e.g., the fungicidal
compositions of Duyfjes, contain one or more hygroscopic
substances and, therefore, require the addition of an
anticaking agent to inhibit formation of aggregates and lumps
and to ensure a free-flowing characteristic. See Van
Nostrand, page 85, right-hand column, first full paragraph.
Nor has the examiner established that (1) the prior art
suggests the desirability that solid fungicidal compositions
be free-flowing; or (2) it was known in the art to add an
anticaking agent or agents to solid fungicidal compositions,
thus ensuring a free-flow characteristic. Therefore, the
examiner has not established an adequate reason, suggestion,
or motivation which would support the rejection under
35 U.S.C. § 103.
The examiner states that "solid formulations are known to
benefit from the addition of adjuvants such as anticaking
agents via retention of free-flowing properties" (Examiner's
Answer, page 6, last full paragraph). That statement is
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007