Appeal No. 1997-3361
Application No. 08/554,939
by the examiner. See, e.g., In re Klosak, 455 F.2d 1077, 1080,
173 USPQ 14, 16 (CCPA 1972).
Relying on the disclosure at column 2, lines 16 and 17 of
Kojima ‘370, the appellants argue that “the selection of
thiosulfates become [sic, becomes] even less likely. ” (Appeal
brief, page 12.) However, Kojima ‘370 teaches that the use of an
appropriate amount of sulfites, which is not excluded by the
appealed claims, overcomes the problems of thiosulfates. (Column
2, lines 3-17.) The problems regarding the use of thiosulfates
as described on column 2, lines 16 and 17 relate to the use of a
thiosulfate by itself or the use of an “elevated amount” of
sulfites to reduce the amount of replenisher. In any event, the
teachings of Kojima ‘370 as a whole, including the teaching at
column 45, lines 40-47, provide the requisite teaching,
motivation or suggestion to arrive at a method encompassed by
appealed claim 1, as we have discussed above.
The appellants also urge that “the claimed concentrations
and molar ratios must be selected from the much broader ranges ”
described in Kojima ‘370. (Appeal brief, page 12.)
Notwithstanding the appellants’ argument, there is no dispute
between the appellants and the examiner that the molar ratios and
the ranges of amounts recited in the appealed claims overlap
12
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007