Appeal No. 96-2059
Application No. 08/182,869
and 21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
Thorsrud in view of Joshi and Wevers. We reverse.
The subject matter on appeal is directed to a process for
forming a unitary solid (macrosolid) cleaning product (such as a
detergent in the form of a tablet) by irradiating a bed of
certain defined starting particles in a container with
subinfrared electromagnetic radiation to raise the temperature of
the particles “so as to transform the bed of particles into a
macrosolid” (appealed claim 1) within the container when cooled.
The term “macrosolid” is defined in the specification at page 1,
line 15 to page 3, line 14, inter alia, as sufficiently large as
to include within itself at least one hypothetical cube having
dimensions of 2.5 mm., as contrasted to conventional granular or
powdered solid cleaning products.
As evidence of obviousness of the claimed process, the
examiner relies on the combined teachings in Thorsrud and Joshi.
We agree with appellants that the examiner’s “primary reference,”
Thorsrud, is only remotely related to the specific subject matter
defined by the appealed claims. Thorsrud is related to a method
for enhancing the radio frequency sensitivity for a “wide variety
of compositions” (column 1, line 40) so that “a multiplicity of
products” can be produced “for a multiplicity of purposes”
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007