Appeal No. 1998-1278
Application No. 08/603,186
acid gas purification apparatuses, such as a conventional carbon-
steel acid gas purification apparatus, as the acid gas
purification apparatus used in the gas purification process
described in Pearce, especially since the conventional carbon-
steel acid purification apparatus can further minimize the
corrosion rate.
Thus, having carefully considered the applied prior art
references of record, we conclude that the examiner has
established a prima facie case of obviousness. In reaching this
conclusion, we have also considered the appellants’ arguments
which are mainly directed to the difference between the claimed
subject matter and the individual references. However, we
determine them to be unconvincing because what the prior art
references individually disclose or would have suggested is not
the appropriate inquiry, when the rejections are based on a
combination of the prior art references. The appropriate inquiry
is what the combination of the disclosures taken as a whole would
have suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art. In re
Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425, 208 USPQ 871, 881 (CCPA 1981).
To rebut the prima facie case established by the examiner,
the appellants argue (Reply Brief, page 2) that:
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007