Appeal No. 1997-0328 Page 7
Application No. 08/094,072
references teachings, it is not seen how one of ordinary skill
in the art would have been directed to also select the
particular combination of surfactants claimed herein in the
amounts recited together with a lower alcohol so as to obtain
a liquid detergent with the claimed viscosity.
It is our view that the examiner has failed to provide
any convincing reasons based on the applied prior art, or on
the basis of knowledge generally available to one of ordinary
skill in the art, as to why the teachings of the references
should be combined in a manner so as to arrive at the claimed
invention.
In reviewing the references relied on by the examiner, we find
that it is difficult to discern on what basis the examiner
reaches an obviousness conclusion with respect to the claimed
invention. We note that the mere fact that the prior art
could be modified as proposed by the examiner is not
sufficient to establish a prima facie case. See In re
Fritsch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1266, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1783 (Fed. Cir.
1992).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007