Appeal No. 1999-0928
Application No. 08/334,952
re Mayne, 104 F.3d 1339, 1342, 41 USPQ2d 1451, 1454 (Fed. Cir.
1997). It is well settled that before a conclusion of
obviousness may be made based on a combination of references,
there must have been a reason, suggestion, or motivation to lead
the inventors to combine those references. See Pro-Mold & Tool
Co. v. Great Lakes Plastics, Inc., 75 F.3d 1568, 1573, 37 USPQ2d
1626, 1629 (Fed. Cir. 1996). The examiner has found that Pons is
directed to electrolyzing water to produce hydrogen, oxygen and
heat using an isotopic hydrogen storage cathode, an anode, and an
aqueous electrolyte (Answer, pages 11-12). However, the examiner
has failed to note that Spaepen is directed to another type of
electrolysis, namely that Spaepen teaches applying a potential
pulse train for influencing an electrocatalytic reaction
proceeding at the electrode, where this reaction is the oxidation
of methanol on platinum or the oxidation of hydrogen, hydrazine,
or ammonia on an alloy (Spaepen, col. 1, ll. 42-67). Spaepen
teaches that it was already known to obviate partly some of the
ageing phenomenons which occur in electrocatalysts by bringing
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007