Appeal No. 2002-0206
Application No. 09/121,725
reducing Vibriones as claimed in claim 6 was not inherently
present in the disclosure of Yasushi.
Further, a reading of the document itself illustrates that it
acknowledges that “[t]he effects of high pressure processing (HPP)
of foods, which is a non-thermal means of preserving food products
with no or minimal heat treatments, has actually been known for
over 90 years (citations omitted). However, it has just recently
re-emerged as a practical technology for cold pasteurization of
foods.” (Exhibit A, Letter of Kilgen, page 3, lines 8-11).
Clearly, then, this is additional support for the proposition that
one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the claimed result
of claims 6 and 7 to be inherent in the process of Yasushi. The
fact that only now had it become practical for use is not fatal to
an anticipation determination.
Third, the appellant adduces the letter of Mr. Collette
characterizing the invention as a “ ‘breakthrough needed to
correct the problem’ [of reduction of Vibrio Vulnificus
bacteria].” (Appeal Brief, page 7, line 10). Again, this letter
does not evidence that its author had any knowledge of the Yasushi
reference, or its impact on the novelty of the instant claims.
Further, the letter more precisely states that the process “could
be one of the breakthroughs needed to correct the problem.” (B,
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007