Appeal No. 2000-0018
Application No. 08/860,941
teachings of Watson and Kasturi or the combined teachings of
these references further with Chapple, such that it is in
liquid form and has a pH in the 6.5-12 range.
Kasturi discloses that his detergent composition can be
in liquid form (col. 24, line 66; col. 25, line 20) and that
the treatment solution pH is preferably 7 to 11, especially
7.5 to 10.5 (col. 20, lines 50-51). For this reason and that
given above regarding claim 1, Kasturi would have fairly
suggested the composition recited in the appellants’ claim 15
to one of ordinary skill in the art.
The appellants argue that Watson’s pH is that of the wash
water rather than the detergent (brief, page 7; reply brief,
page 4). It reasonably appears, however, that one of ordinary
skill in the art would have expected a desired wash water pH
to be obtained by use of a detergent having that pH rather
than another pH. The appellants have provided no evidence or
reasoning to the contrary.
The appellants argue that Watson discloses a pH optimum
of 5 to 9.5 for bacterial and fungal cellulase, but does not
disclose a pH optimum for amalyse (reply brief, page 4). For
a prima facie case of obviousness to be established, however,
9–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007