Appeal No. 1997-3383
Application No. 08/310,052
that the "Raschig rings" control Example 18 achieves
significant reduction in diisocyanade concentration, the
indication by Maegerlein that substantial amounts of polyurea
deposition required "the test to be stopped" is a teaching
that cannot be overlooked when considering whether or not one
of ordinary skill in this art would have been motivated to
modify the "control test" Example 18 for treatment of
"contaminated-containing air . . . from a polyurethane
processing line" as required by the claimed process.
Arguably, while the above may not constitute an express
"teaching away" from appellants' claimed process, the reported
polyurea deposition problem is clearly relevant to the
question as to whether the prior art reference contains both
an adequate suggestion to practice appellants' claimed process
as well as detailed enabling methodology for practicing the
process and evidence suggesting that it would be successful.
In re O'Farrell, 853 F.2d 894, 902, 7 USPQ2d 1673, 1680 (Fed.
Cir. 1988). In our view, in light of the polyurea deposition
problem reported for control test Example 18 of Maegerlein,
there is little likelihood that a person of ordinary skill in
this art would have been motivated to make any modification of
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007