Appeal No. 2002-1356
Application No. 09/206,063
of presenting a prima facie case of obviousness. See In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531,
1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993). It is well-established that the
conclusion that the claimed subject matter is prima facie obvious must be supported by
evidence, as shown by some objective teaching in the prior art or by knowledge
generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art that would have led that individual to
combine the relevant teachings of the references to arrive at the claimed invention.
See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1074, 5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir. 1988).
Claim 5
Claim 5 is directed to a method of preparing a stabilized osmotic agent
comprising the following steps: providing a solution of starch dissolved in water and
adding NaBH4 to the starch solution to reduce the starch. We interpret the term
“stabilized osmotic agents” in claim 5 to include maltodextrins reduced using water and
NaBH4, in accordance with the specification.
According to the examiner, “the use of sodium borohydride [NaBH4] to reduce
saccharides is well known in the art as Solomons teaches that aldoses and ketoses can
be reduced with sodium borohydrides.” Answer, page 4. Solomons particularly
describes the reduction of D-glucose (a component of maltodextrin) to D-glucitol.
Solomons, page 890. Solomons does not teach the presence of water in the reaction
According to the examiner, “Eliasson teaches that other non-cellulosic polysaccharides
(e.g., arabinoxylans, xyloglucans and glucomannans) are preferentially extracted using
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007