Appeal No. 2000-0018
Application No. 08/860,941
the optimum pH need not be disclosed. All that is required is
that the teachings from the applied prior art appear to have
suggested the claimed subject matter to one of ordinary skill
in the art. See In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1051, 189 USPQ
143, 147 (CCPA 1976). As discussed above, the applied prior
art would have provided one of ordinary skill in the art with
such a suggestion.
The appellants argue that although the heavy duty liquid
cleaning composition in Kasturi’s example in which the pH is
up to 7.5 (col. 26, line 13) contains an amylase enzyme and an
alkoxylated alcohol having an average of 3 ethylene oxide
groups per molecule, it does not contain a zeolite,
particularly the appellants’ small particle size zeolite
(brief, page 8). Kasturi’s disclosure as a whole, however,
including the portion which discloses that the composition can
contain zeolite MAP (col. 14, lines 35-36), would have fairly
suggested, to one of ordinary skill in the art, the
composition recited in the appellants’ claim 15.
Accordingly, we affirm the rejections of the appellants’
claim 15.
Rejection of claim 6 over Watson
10–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007