Appeal No. 1998-1157
Application 08/278,782
particles of an endothermic reaction catalyst with separate
particles of a hydrogen oxidizing solid reagent.
We note that whether the hydrogen oxidizing solid
reagent and the solid catalyst are combined by being in the
same particle, or are combined by intermixing separate
particles, the result of utilizing the hydrogen oxidizing
solid reagent in combination with the solid catalyst is
reasonably expected to be the same. Absent proof in the
record that the way in which the two are mixed produces any
new and unexpected results, we determine that one of
ordinary skill in the art would have been led to employ
either mixture in the process of Drehman with a reasonable
expectation of successfully producing the same or similar
result. See In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 692, 69 USPQ 330,
332 (CCPA 1946). In this light, we note that page 5 of
appellants’ specification indicates that the solid catalyst
and the hydrogen oxidizing solid reagent are intermixed,
either as separate particles or incorporated within the same
particle. In other words, appellants acknowledge that
either mixing technique would have provided the same result,
thus indicating that the choice of separate particles is not
critical. Although appellants state that the choice of
separate particles provides for the ability to regenerate
the catalyst and the reagent (brief, page 10), appellants do
not show that such an ability is unexpected.
In view of the above, we sustain the rejection
involving claims 4, 8, 10-12 and 14.
CONCLUSION
In view of the above, the rejection of claims 1-17
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Drehman is affirmed.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007