Appeal No. 1997-1464
Application No. 08/235,542
examiner explicitly equates to the here claimed liquid
ingredients, namely, molasses and oil (appealed claim 1) or
hydrocarbon-based solution (appealed claim 19). While the
examiner acknowledges that Paersch teaches adding his first
and second binders separately, the examiner urges that
patentee also teaches at lines 3 through 20 in column 3 adding
these binders “in combination” (answer, page 3). More
specifically, the examiner considers the Paersch reference to
teach adding the first and second binders in combination by
virtue of the disclosure “[t]he first and second binders are
conveniently added by spraying” at lines 3 and 4 of column 3
(see the paragraph bridging pages 5 and 6 of the answer).
We cannot agree with the examiner’s position that
patentee teaches adding his first and second binders in
combination. The above quoted disclosure at lines 3 and 4 of
column 3 does not recite and would not have suggested anything
about the two binders being in combination. Moreover, as
explained by the appellants in their brief and reply brief,
the disclosure of the Paersch reference unambiguously requires
that the first and second binders be added to coal particles
separately in order to obtain specified desiderata including a
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007