Appeal No. 1998-0434
Application 08/620,745
e.g., economy of storage and suitability for making solutions
of various concentrations.
For the above reasons, we hold that the appellants’
claimed invention would have been prima facie obvious to one
of ordinary skill in the art over Yamada. Because, as
mentioned above, Nishigaki presents a disclosure which is
similar to the relevant disclosure in Yamada, we also hold
that appellants’ claimed invention would have been prima facie
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art over Nishigaki.
The appellants argue that the references do not
appreciate that gluconic acid contributes to the stability of
a concentrated fixing solution (brief, page 4; reply brief,
page 2). For a prima facie case of obviousness to be
established, however, references need not recognize the
problem solved by the appellants. See In re Kemps, 97 F.3d
1427, 1430, 40 USPQ2d 1309, 1311 (Fed. Cir. 1996); In re
Beattie, 974 F.2d 1309, 1312, 24 USPQ2d 1040, 1042 (Fed. Cir.
1992); In re Dillon, 919 F.2d 688, 693, 16 USPQ2d 1897, 1901
(Fed. Cir. 1990) (en banc), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 904 (1991);
In re Lintner, 458 F.2d 1013, 1016, 173 USPQ 560, 562 (CCPA
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007