Appeal No. 2001-0771
Application No. 09/103,528
Claims 1-17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 for
obviousness in view of Casci taken in combination with Kuehl.1
We have carefully considered the issues in this case in
light of the evidentiary record and the positions advanced by the
appellants and the examiner. Having done so, we conclude that
the examiner has established a prima facie case of obviousness
which is not outweighed by the evidence of nonobviousness adduced
by the appellants. Accordingly, we shall affirm the rejection at
issue.
We agree with the examiner that the Kuehl disclosure would
have provided the requisite motivation under 35 U.S.C. § 103 to
subject the EU-1 zeolite of Casci to “dealumination” (removal of
aluminum) in order to enhance its catalytic activity, as
suggested by Kuehl (col. 2, ll. 54-68; col. 12, ll. 59-63).
Appellants argue that the reasoning advanced by the examiner
is an oversimplification of the Kuehl disclosure. According to
the appellants, Kuehl attributes enhanced catalytic activity not
to the removal of aluminum, per se, but to the resultant high
1The final rejection included another ground of rejection based
upon the application of Casci alone, alternatively under either
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) or 35 U.S.C. § 103. That rejection has been
withdrawn by the examiner as being overcome by evidence submitted
by appellants on Nov. 29, 1999 (Martino Declaration).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007