Appeal No. 1999-1276 Page 10
Application No. 08/318,574
The difficulty with the examiner's reasoning is that it presumes that, for the
Clements composition to work, that no decomposition of peracids occurs during
use. It is not at all clear that catalase would not decompose organic peracids.
Moreover, the claimed method is not directed to adding catalase to a solution of
organic peracids per se but to a solution of organic peracids with a high
background of hydrogen peroxide. The Clements patents do not disclose
introducing catalase to such a solution. In fact, the Clements patents disclose using
catalase to remove persalts not hydrogen peroxide. The Clements patents have no
appreciation of the effect catalase has on organic peracids when the two are in the
presence of a high background of hydrogen peroxide.
Accordingly, examiner’s premise that catalase does not decompose
organic peracids is speculative. As a result, there can be no reasonable
expectation of success that employing catalase in a quantitating method involving a
solution of organic peracids and a high background of hydrogen peroxide would
result in the reaction of all the hydrogen peroxide and without the decomposition of
the organic peracids.
The only reason for selecting catalase and in an amount as claimed is
provided by appellants’ disclosure. On pages 4-6 of the specification, appellants
indicate that a need exists for preventing interference with quantitation
determinations of peracids in the presence of high concentration of hydrogen
peroxide. According to appellants, peracid has a relatively short half-life in the
presence of hydrogen peroxide, making quantitation difficult. Appellants describe
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007