Appeal No. 2001-0729
Application No. 09/013,091
whether the prior art would have revealed that in so making, or
carrying out, those of ordinary skill in the art would have a
reasonable expectation of success. In re Vaeck, 947 F.2d, 488,
493, 20 USPQ2d 1438, 1442 (Fed. Cir. 1991). “Both the suggestion
and the reasonable expectation of success must be founded in the
prior art, not in the applicant’s disclosure.” Id.
The examiner relies on Asami as disclosing a method of
preparing a silver chloride emulsion using cubic silver halide
grains containing at least 95% chloride. Examiner’s answer,
paper no. 20, mailed November 6, 2000, page 3. Asami teaches the
addition of a green sensitizing dye, sodium thiosulfate and
potassium bromide to the emulsion which is then heated during
spectral and chemical sensitization and cooled to terminate
sensitization. Id. The examiner concedes that Asami does not
specifically disclose the addition of gold sulfide to the
emulsion. See id., pages 4 and 6. The examiner further concedes
that “Asami also fails to provide a teaching to specifically
choose to use gold sulfide and sodium thiosulfate as the gold and
sulfur sensitizer.” Id. at page 5. However, the examiner
references Asami’s general disclosure of chemically sensitizing
silver halide grains with “sulfur, selenium, noble metal, and
reduction sensitizer solely or in combination.” Id. at page 4,
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007