Appeal No. 1997-3118
Application No. 08/372,083
examiner does not establish that the bleached pulp used by
Economou contains the surface active carboxyl compounds
required by appellants’ claims or explain why, if the pulp
does not contain such compounds, one of ordinary skill in the
art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in
applying Economou’s process to an aqueous suspension
containing them. See In re Vaeck, 947 F.2d 488, 493, 20
USPQ2d 1438, 1442 (Fed. Cir. 1991); In re O’Farrell, 853 F.2d
894, 902, 7 USPQ2d 1673, 1680 (Fed. Cir. 1988). Also,
Economou’s anionic and cationic polymers (col. 5, lines 17-54)
are different than those used by Smith (page 3, lines 7-41).
The examiner does not explain why one of ordinary skill in the
art would have reasonably expected Economou’s teaching
regarding the use of alum with his anionic and cationic
polymers to apply to the use of alum with Smith’s anionic and
cationic polymers. Thus, the examiner’s argument that Smith
and Economou would have fairly suggested, to one of ordinary
skill in the art, adding an amount of alum to Smith’s
suspension which improves paper strength (answer, page 5) is
not persuasive.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007