Ex parte HOLGADO et al. - Page 6




               Appeal No. 1997-1556                                                                                               
               Application 08/340,247                                                                                             


               1531 (Fed. Cir. 1988).  In proceedings before the PTO the examiner has the burden of establishing the              
               prima facie case of unpatentability.  In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed.               
               Cir. 1992); In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1265, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1783 (Fed. Cir. 1992); In re Piasecki,              
               745 F.2d 1468, 1472, 223 USPQ 785, 788 (Fed. Cir. 1984); In re Rhinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1052, 189                 
               USPQ 143, 147 (CCPA 1976).  To meet this burden, the examiner must present a factual basis supporting              
               the conclusion that a prima facie case exists.  In re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017, 154 USPQ 173, 178               
               (CCPA 1967); In re Lunsford, 357 F.2d 385, 392, 148 USPQ 721, 726 (CCPA 1966); In re Freed, 425                    
               F.2d 785, 788, 165 USPQ 570, 572 (CCPA 1970).                                                                      
                      First, the examiner has not explained why the person having ordinary skill in the art would be              
               motivated to select a tributoxyethyl phosphate from the numerous phosphates disclosed by Moreton.                  
               Second, and we think more importantly in this case, the record does not establish that there would be a            
               reasonable expectation of success in substituting tributoxyethyl phosphate for tributyl phosphate or tricresyl     
               phosphate.  To the extent Moreton teaches interchangeability of the various phosphates, it is with respect         
               to compositions including substantial amounts of an aliphatic halogen.  Moreton provides no guidance with          
               respect to the compatibility of any of the phosphates with natural  triglycerides.  The examiner has not           
               asserted and not provided any basis to hold that one having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized        
               that tributoxyethyl phosphate is so structurally similar to tributyl phosphate or tricresyl phosphate that the     
               properties of the former would be expected to be similar to the latter two phosphates.  Based on the               
               teachings of the references, we can not conclude that a person having ordinary skill in the art would have         
               a reasonable expectation of success in substituting tributoxyethyl phosphate for the tributyl phosphate or         
               tricresyl phosphate in the Kulazhanov and Thornley hydraulic fluids.  In failing to demonstrate that the           
               person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to substitute tributoxyethyl phosphate and           
               a reasonable expectation of success in making the substitution, the examiner has not met her burden of             
               establishing the prima facie obviousness of the claimed subject matter.                                            

                                                                6                                                                 





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007