Appeal No. 1998-1390
Application 08/607,441
waxes, pigments, crystallization initiators, and other
materials. Secondly, cellulose powder necessarily is useful
in a multiplicity of technologies, not just as a “cellulosic
filler” for plastics. Evidence that the mere mention of
cellulose powder in a prior art reference is necessarily
suggestive of a cellulosic filler utility is not of record.
Looked at in a light most favorable to the examiner, we
find that at best, Nara’s disclosure is generic to wood meal
as a specie of “mother” particle only because Nara’s
disclosure is of potentially infinite scope. This is not a
proper basis for establishing a prima facie case of
obviousness for an otherwise
unsuggested specie. In re Jones, 958 F2d 347, 350, 21 USPQ2d
1941, 1943 (Fed. Cir. 1992). For this reason, we are unable
to sustain the examiner’s stated prior art rejection of the
appealed claims.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007