Ex parte LOTT - Page 4


                  Appeal No. 1997-3355                                                                                       
                  Application No. 08/375,456                                                                                 

                  of sugars, (b) without drying the particles, applying a powdered wax coating to the                        
                  emulsion-coated particles, (c) tumbling the particles to polish the wax coating, and                       
                  (d) drying the polished particles.                                                                         
                         The Biddle process includes (a) applying an emulsion, (b) drying the applied                        
                  emulsion, (c) imprinting indicia, (d) drying the indicia, (e) applying a protective                        
                  transparent outer coating of a suitable material, and (f) polishing the protective                         
                  transparent outer coating.  See column 2, lines 29-38 of Biddle.                                           
                         The examiner asserts that steps (b), (c), and (d) of Biddle are extra steps, not                    
                  specifically included in appellant’s claim 1 (Answer, page 4).  The examiner also                          
                  asserts, however, that the omission of a method step of a known process with the                           
                  corresponding omission of that step’s function is not patentable and cites In re                           
                  Brown and Kernan, 228, F.2d 247, 249,  108 USPQ 232, 234  (CCPA 1955), and                                 
                  concludes that appellant’s claims 1 and 14 would have been obvious in view of                              
                  Biddle.                                                                                                    
                         The function of the process steps in Biddle of  (b) drying the applied                              
                  emulsion, (c) imprinting indicia, and (d) drying the indicia, are to obtain clearly                        
                  visible identifying markings, without the use of hazardous materials, in a simpler and                     
                  less time consuming way (column 2, lines 9-28).  Also, the wax emulsion can serve                          
                  as a final color coat.  Without these steps, the objects of Biddle’s invention would                       
                  not be obtained.  Accordingly, these steps are critical aspects of Biddle’s process,                       
                  and there exists no reasonable basis for omitting them from Biddle’s process, and                          
                  the examiner has not pointed out such a basis.  Hence, it would not have been                              
                  obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to omit the critical steps of Biddle.    Ex                    
                  parte Robert K. Schultz  [complete cite].                                                                  
                         Moreover, assuming, arguendo, that Biddle’s process could have been                                 
                  altered as suggested by the examiner, Biddle does not teach or suggest the use of                          
                  a dry, powdered wax coating as required by appellants’ claim 1, as pointed                                 




                                                              4                                                              



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007