Appeal No. 2001-0964
Application No. 09/069,442
Moreover, the concentration ranges taught by Korbelak for these
ingredients encompass, and thus either expressly disclose or at
least would have suggested, concentration values of the type here
claimed.
Finally, for a number of reasons, the artisan in formulating
the above discussed electroplating bath would not have used the
cobalt, nickel or cadmium compounds which patentee includes
(along with iron compounds) as possible ingredients for his fifth
component. First of all, the Korbelak reference contains no
teaching that cobalt, nickel or cadmium compounds are required in
order to formulate an effective electroplating bath. Secondly,
patentee expressly discloses several effective bath formulations
which do not include cobalt, nickel or cadmium compounds (e.g.,
see solutions E, G, H, I, J and M in columns 4-6). This last
mentioned disclosure would have led the artisan to reasonably
expect success in formulating an electroplating bath which is
free of cobalt, cadmium and nickel ions as required by the claims
under consideration. In re O’Farrell, 853 F.2d at 903-04, 7
USPQ2d at 1681.
14
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007