Appeal No. 1999-0697 Page 6
Application No. 08/743,151
purpose from Laumann’s teachings, let alone the
unsubstantiated dispersant utility asserted by the examiner.
On this record, the examiner has simply not furnished any
convincing reasons to suggest that the amounts of other
coating components used by Laumann would be viewed by one of
ordinary skill in the art as instructive as to the amount of
stearic acid to be optionally added.
Accordingly, the rejection fails for lack of a sufficient
factual basis upon which to reach a conclusion of obviousness.
In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988).
The decision of the examiner to reject claims 1-24 under
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007