Appeal No. 1998-2836
Application No. 08/453,211
brief, p. 15. Notwithstanding the appellants’ argument, we
have determined, supra, that Oonishi is evidence that calcium
phosphate derived from powdered bone, which is “animal bone
powder” as broadly defined in the appellants’ specification,
and synthesized HAp were known to be useful in the art for the
same purpose prior to the appellants’ invention. Thus, we
agree with the examiner that it would have been prima facie
obvious to an artisan prior to the appellants’ invention to
use a combination of calcium phosphate derived from powdered
bone and synthesized HAp as the HAp component in the
composition disclosed by the Ito reference. See In re
Kerkhoven, 626 F.2d 846, 850, 205 USPQ 1069, 1072 (CCPA 1980).
Like claim 3, claim 19 requires both animal bone powder
and chemically synthesized particulate HAp. In addition,
claim 19 recites that “said bone substitute material induces
bone formation.” The appellants argue (main brief, p. 17)
that neither Ito nor Oonishi suggest that substitute bone
material comprising animal bone powder can induce bone
formation. We do not agree. In fact, Oonishi specifically
11
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007