Appeal No. 95-2971
Application No. 07/742,260
DISCUSSION
The rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103
Claims 1-10:
Claims 1-10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Hara I, Hara II, Sugiyama, in view of Shimizu, Gaffar, Fuller, Yamada, Koyama and in
further view of Fukuda.
The examiner has relied upon 9 references, including 4 newly cited in the
Examiner's Answer (Answer), in setting forth the basis for this rejection. The examiner
briefly describes the disclosure of each reference (Answer, pages 4-9) and then concludes
at page 10 of the Answer:
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time
of the invention was made to produce the claimed glucomannan derived
from konjac, since Fukuda shows that such a clarified konjac having a
nitrogen content of about 0.60 wt % or less is well known in the art and since
the process steps disclosed by Hara (JP 58-165758 and JP 59-227267),
Sugiyama et al, Shimizu et al, Gaffar et al, Fuller et al, Yamada et al and
Koyama et al references suggest a konjac product in which the insoluble
impurities were removed and a konjac product which has an aqueous sol
turbidity potential within the scope of that which is claimed by the Appellants.
The examiner bears the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of
obviousness. In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444
(Fed. Cir. 1992). On the record before us, we find that the examiner has failed to provide
sufficient explanation to establish a prima facie case of unpatentability of the claimed
subject matter.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007