Appeal No. 1996-0212
Application No. 08/261,759
known fertilizer compositions used for soil applications and
also use them for ‘foliar’ applications.” See the answer at
page 5. Thus, there are inadequate facts of record based on
the Borisov and Noonen disclosures to support the required
finding that one of ordinary skill in this art would have been
led to utilize the Borisov fertilizer in a foliar application
as claimed based on a reasonable expectation of success.
Accordingly, the stated obviousness rejection of appealed
claims 1-5, 21-29, and 36-40 is reversed.
REMAND TO THE EXAMINER
With respect to the question of the obviousness of the
subject matter on appeal herein, the examiner should
reconsider the relevance of the disclosures found in a prior
art publication to Koontz et al. (Koontz) relating to foliar
applied phosphorus. See Koontz et al. (Koontz), “Factors
Affecting Absorption and Translocation of Foliar Applied
Phosphorus”, Plant Physiology, (1957) 32:463-470.
Specifically, Koontz indicates at page 465 that the
effectiveness in supplying foliar phosphorus from two
phosphorus compounds was “due to their effective retention of
moisture” since these compounds “did not crystallize on the
11
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007