Appeal No. 2000-0018
Application No. 08/860,941
expressed as a d value, of less than 1.0 micrometers, 2) an50 1
enzyme which can be an amylase enzyme (col. 10, line 58), and 2
3) a surfactant which can be a conventional nonionic
surfactant such as a C -C alkyl ethoxylate (col. 8, lines 10-
12 18
11).
Watson does not disclose that the C -C alkyl ethoxylate
12 18
can have less than 5 alkylene oxide groups per molecule and a
hydrophilic lipophilic balance value of less than 9.5.
However, the teaching that the composition can contain a
conventional C -C alkyl ethoxylate surfactant would have
12 18
fairly suggested, to one of ordinary skill in the art, using
any C -C alkyl ethoxylate known to be suitable for use in a
12 18
detergent composition, such as the condensation product of a
C -C linear alcohol with 3.0 moles of ethylene oxide, having
12 13
a hydrophilic lipophilic balance value of 8-11, preferably 8-
1It is axiomatic that our consideration of the prior art
must, of necessity, include consideration of the admitted
prior art. See In re Hedges, 783 F.2d 1038, 1039-40, 228 USPQ
685, 686 (Fed. Cir. 1986); In re Davis, 305 F.2d 501, 503, 134
USPQ 256, 258 (CCPA 1962).
2The appellants further acknowledge that it was known in
the art to use zeolite MAP in combination with an enzyme
(specification, page 2).
4–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007