Appeal No. 96-0641
Application No. 08/004,890
(Keskey)
BASF 30 48 493 Jul. 15, 1982
(German)
All of the claims on appeal stand rejected under 35
U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Keskey in view of the BASF
German reference or Miller. According to the examiner, “[i]t
would have been obvious to use any of the catalyst or acid
salt compounds of Miller or BASF in the Keskey composition”
(answer, page 4).
We can not agree and therefore can not sustain the above
noted rejection.
For obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103, there must have
been a suggestion as well as a reasonable expectation of
success for the modification here proposed by the examiner.
In re O’Farrell, 853 F.2d 894, 903-904, 7 USPQ2d 1673, 1680-
1681 (Fed. Cir. 1988). In this case, however, the applied
prior art contains neither the requisite suggestion nor
reasonable expectation of success for providing the
composition of Keskey with an acidic compound-amine salt
catalyst of the type taught by the secondary references.
This is because the polymer reactants (i.e., an oxazoline
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007