Appeal No. 96-2335
Application 08/213,375
person of ordinary skill in the art or would have motivated a person of ordinary skill in the
art to combine the applied references in the proposed manner to arrive at the claimed
invention. See Carella v. Starlight Archery Pro Line Co., 804 F.2d 135, 140, 231 USPQ
644, 647 (Fed Cir. 1986); Ashland Oil, Inc. v. Delta Resins & Refractories, Inc., 776 F.2d
281, 293, 227 USPQ 657, 664 (Fed. Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1017 (1986); In re
Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1051-1052, 189 USPQ 143, 147 (CCPA 1976).
Contrary to the examiner’s allegation, Baron does not teach the use of salts
of oxygen acids of sulfur to prewash the adsorbent carbon. Rather he discloses a known
purification method for APAP comprising acetylating N-acetyl-para-aminophenol in the
presence of salts of inorganic sulfur acid compounds to reduce the color of the ultimate
product. These compounds are described as the oxygen acids of sulfur wherein the sulfur
is in a lower valence state when in sulfuric acid, e.g., sodium dithionate. In addition,
Baron teaches purification of crude APAP by treating an aqueous solution of APAP with a
carbon that has been preliminarily treated with an acidic solution. Thus, Baron teaches the
individual use of sodium dithionate and an acid washed carbon to purify crude APAP.
The examiner has not explained how the individual or combined use of these purifying
agents would be suggestive of acid washed carbon pretreated with a solution of reducing
sulfite for the purification of crude APAP. Kosak does not remedy the deficiencies of
Baron. The Kosak method of purification of crude APAP involves the use of the
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007