Appeal No. 1999-0989 4
Application No. 08/265,267
over Biron in view of Gabrick and further in view of Winkler.
Claim 28 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Thirumalachar in view of Gabrick and Biron and further in view of Winkler.
OPINION
We have carefully considered all of the arguments advanced by the appellant and the
examiner, and agree with the appellant that the rejections of claims 2 through 5, 8 through
10, 12, 21 through 24, 26, 27 and 28 are not well founded. Accordingly, we reverse
these rejections. We agree with the examiner that the rejection of claims 1, 6, 7, 11, and
29 are well founded. Accordingly, we affirm these rejections.
The Rejection under Section 102(b)
In order for a claimed invention to be anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b), all of
the elements of the claim must be found in one reference. Scripps Clinic & Research
Found. v. Genentech Inc., 927 F.2d 1565, 1576, 18 USPQ2d 1001, 1010 (Fed. Cir.
1991). Gabrick is directed to a method for controlling and recovering oil spills from a
body of water. See column 1, lines 13-15. To that end Gabrick discloses that it is an
object of the invention to absorb oil from an oil slick and to convert an oil slick to a dry
agglomerated powder. See column 2, lines 6-14.
We find that Gabrick discloses that oil is absorbed by the presence of an elastomeric
composition comprising a block copolymer of styrene and an ethylene elastomer,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007