Appeal No. 2001-0600
Application No. 08/584,776
on the mere identification . . . of individual components of
claimed limitations. Rather, particular findings must be made as
to the reason the skilled artisan, with no knowledge of the
claimed invention, would have selected these components for
combination in the manner claimed." Ecolochem, Inc. v. Southern
California Edison Co., 227 F.3d 1361, 1375, 56 USPQ2d 1065, 1076
(Fed. Cir. 2000) (quoting Kotzab, 217 F.3d at 1371, 55 USPQ2d at
1317).
According to the examiner, it would have been obvious to one
of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have
prepared the $ modification of the dye disclosed in the admitted
prior art (specification, page 1, lines 18-31) in view of the
teachings in the secondary references. In particular, the
examiner maintains that the secondary references teach that in
dispersed dyes, different crystal modifications can be expected
and that the more stable modification, i.e., the one giving the
best dying properties, is usually designated as the $
modification. See Examiner’s answer, page 4. The examiner also
concludes that it would have been obvious to have prepared the $
modification using the processes of claims 2-18 since these
processes are taught in the prior art and “structurally similar
dyes would be expected to be dyes and dyes substrates with like
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007