Appeal No. 1996-0098
Application No. 08/207,512
of "a size of from 0.1 to 50 micrometers" (column 3, lines 17-
22) as a thickening agent, the patent does not suggest the use
of two different particle size ranges of the powder as
claimed. Moreover, in our view, the examiner has not
furnished a convincing line of reasoning indicating why a
skilled artisan would have found the claimed composition prima
facie obvious from the combined reference teachings.
In short, the record before us does not support a
conclusion that the examiner has met the burden of presenting
a prima facie case of obviousness. From our perspective, the
examiner's rejections appear to be premised on impermissible
hindsight reasoning. It follows that we cannot sustain the
examiner's stated § 103 rejections of the appealed claims.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
JOHN D. SMITH )
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007