Appeal No. 1999-0663
Application 08/624,047
appellants’ claimed catalyst prima facie obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art over Scott. See In re Malagari, 499
F.2d 1297, 1303, 182 USPQ 549, 553 (CCPA 1974).
The appellants argue that Scott does not provide a written
description of the claimed invention (reply brief, page 2). This
argument is not relevant because it is directed toward
anticipation whereas the ground of the rejection is obviousness.
The appellants argue that Scott encompasses the use of equal
ratios of K to Mg, whereas the appellants’ claims do not include
an equal ratio of these components (reply brief, page 2). Scott,
however, would have fairly suggested, to one of ordinary skill in
the art, the overlapping portion of the K/Mg ratios of the
appellants and Scott.
The appellants argue that Scott merely substituted potassium
for sodium in a previously disclosed catalyst (reply brief,
pages 2-3). Scott refers to prior art catalysts which contain
copper chloride, magnesium chloride and sodium and/or lithium
chloride (page 2, lines 20-29). This disclosure is not pertinent
to the issue of whether Scott’s ranges which overlap those of the
appellants would have rendered the appellants’ claimed catalyst
prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
The appellants argue that soiling, i.e. fouling, of heat
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007