Appeal No. 1997-2974
Application No. 08/288,313
by appellant indicates that the Brown process cannot
consistently produce pure zeolite P on an industrial scale,
or, at most, always produces a mixture of zeolite P and
zeolite A. However, inasmuch as the appealed claims do not
define any degree of purity for the produced zeolite P, the
drawbacks of the Brown process described by WO '662 cannot
serve as a point of distinction from the claimed process. In
other words, there is no evidence of record that processes
within the scope of the appealed claims are unexpectedly
superior to the processes of producing P zeolite disclosed by
Brown in terms of consistency or purity. Since the examiner
correctly reasons that it is a matter of obviousness for one
of ordinary skill in the art to make the appropriate
modifications when scaling up a bench procedure to industrial
size, and it was also well-known in the art to employ zeolite
seed in forming zeolites, the burden is not insubstantial on
appellant to present evidence of nonobviousness to outweigh
the evidence of obviousness. In our view, no such evidence of
nonobviousness is of record.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, the examiner's
decision rejecting the appealed claims is affirmed.
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007