Appeal No. 1999-2529
Application 08/915,683
reference clearly discloses that both silver bromide and silver bromoiodide are useful (e.g., col.
12, 65-67) and discloses methods to prepare the former that “exclude iodide” (col. 16, lines 50-
68). We further note that gold sensitizers are taught by Evans to be used at least in combination
with other sensitizers including “sulfur,” for chemically sensitizing the core regardless of the
silver halide of which the core is composed (e.g., col. 11, lines 22-46). While Evans provides an
example of a silver bromoiodide core chemically sensitized with sulfur containing sodium
thiosulfate pentahydrate and gold containing potassium tetrachloroaurate in Emulsion A thereof
(col. 69, lines 20-49), we determine that one of ordinary skill in this art would have recognized
from the teachings of Evans that silver bromide and other combinations of other sensitizers and
gold sensitizers can be used as well to obtain core/shell grain containing emulsions having the
properties taught by the reference (id.). See generally, Merck & Co., Inc. v. Biocraft Labs., Inc.,
874 F.2d 804, 807, 10 USPQ2d 1843, 1845-46 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (“That the ‘813 patent discloses
a multitude of effective combinations does not render any particular formulation less obvious.
This is especially true because the claimed composition is used for the identical purpose.”); In re
Lemin, 332 F.2d 839, 841, 141 USPQ 814, 815-16 (CCPA 1964) (“Generally speaking there is
nothing unobvious in choosing ‘some’ among ‘many’ indiscriminately.”).
Turning now to issue of the absence of the presence of at least one thiosulfonate
compound of formulae (A) through (C) of appealed claim 1 during chemical sensitization of the
core silver bromide as set forth in appealed claim 1, we find that each of Tanemura (e.g., col. 10,
line 25, to col. 11, line 51; col. 4, line 56; col. 5, line 64, to col. 6, line 6; and col. 11, line 66, to
col. 12, line 2) and Shuto (e.g., col. 2, line 53, to col. 7, line 20; col. 10, lines 43 and 52-55; and
col. 7, lines 44-46) clearly would have taught one of ordinary skill in this art that the core of the
core/shell tabular grains of Evans can be chemically sensitized in the presence of at least one
thiosulfonate compound which falls into formulae (A) through (C) of appealed claim 1. In this
respect, both of Tanemura (e.g., col. 4, lines 67-68, and Example 1) and Shuto (e.g., col. 10, lines
67-68, and Example 1) also teach that preferably no silver iodide is present in the core and
exemplify grains with silver bromide cores, and Evans does teach that silver iodide is used in the
preparation of silver bromoiodide in Emulsion A (col. 69, lines 21-40) and that silver bromide
can be prepared by processes that “exclude iodide” as we discussed above.
- 4 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007