Appeal No. 1998-1369
Application No. 08/622,620
claimed compositions (e.g., “sulfurised” vegetable oils and
zinc dialkyldithiophosphates; see col. 5, l. 51-col. 6, l. 2).
The examiner also finds that the individual components of
appellants’ claimed composition were “notoriously” well-known
lubricant additives (Answer, page 5). From these findings,
the examiner concludes that the combination of known additives
for their well-known function or property would have been
prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the
lubricating art at the time of appellants’ invention (Answer,
pages 4-5). We agree.
Appellants have not contested the examiner’s statement
that the individual components of the claimed composition were
well-known in the art with well-known properties as additives
for lubricating compositions. Appellants argue that Eby does
not relate to or suggest the use of the hydrocarbyl mercaptan
together with a sulfur-containing antiwear or EP agent and/or
a basic nitrogen compound (Brief, page 6). Appellants’
argument is not well taken since Eby specifically suggests
combination of the mercaptan with sulfur-containing antiwear
and EP agents, e.g., sulfurized fatty oils (see Eby, page 4,
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007