Appeal No. 1996-2844
Application No. 07/955,162
of unfixed variables. See In re Dunn, 349 F.2d 433, 439, 146
USPQ 479, 483 (CCPA 1965).
Third, the formulation said to represent appellant’s
invention (formulation A) includes three components (sodium
hydroxide, a polysiloxane and a polyoxypropylene-
polyoxyethylene block copolymer) which are not required at all
by appellant’s claims. Thus, the proferred evidence is not
commensurate with the scope of the claims. See In re
Grasselli, 713 F.2d 731, 743, 218 USPQ 769, 778 (Fed. Cir.
1983).
We find it unnecessary to discuss the secondary
references in any detail since there is little dispute that
they suggest the specific borate (Daignault) and molybdate
(Hirozawa) of claim 2.
For the foregoing reasons, the decision of the examiner
is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007