Appeal No. 1997-0448
Application No. 08/327,980
The examiner states, without further explanation, that “calcium molybdate ... would appear to
be soluble (see the abstract).” According to the examiner, it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art “to use lime to form soluble molybdates in the process of Barry because Sohn
teaches that such use also forms soluble molybdates, eg. calcium molybdate, which are similar to the
soluble molybdates formed in Barry and Vertes” (answer, page 5, para. 4).
Assuming arguendo that calcium molybdate is water-soluble, the examiner still has not
explained how one of ordinary skill in the art would have obtained molybdenum trioxide from calcium
molybdate, especially given Vertes’ disclosure that calcination is not a universally applicable method of
converting any and all molybdates to molybdenum trioxide. The examiner has not pointed out, and we
do not find, where Barry, Vertes, Chiola and/or Sohn disclose or suggest how to obtain molybdenum
trioxide from calcium molybdate. Thus, we conclude that the examiner has not carried his burden of
establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of claims 20 and 21 over Barry in view of Vertes and
Chiola, taken further in view of Sohn.
III. Rejection of claims 20-21 as obvious over Barry in view of Vertes and Chiola and Sohn as
applied to claims 1-7 and 10-21 above, and further in view of GB ‘472.
GB ‘472 discloses forming normal calcium molybdate directly without the formation of water-
soluble molybdates by treating completely roasted molybdenum glance with lime, preferably at boiling
- 13 -
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007