Appeal No. 2003-0850
Application No. 09/334,366
disclosing a composition containing alkyl polyglycosides and inert carriers in ratios which
overlap those recited in the claims. However, as pointed out by appellant, none of the
cited references disclose or suggest a “composite” dispersing agent as required by the
claims.
Accordingly, the rejection is reversed.
3. The rejection of claims 21-28 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over
Garst ‘078, in view of Pilato and Garst ‘115 and further in view of Moorer
The examiner maintains that Garst ‘078, Pilato and Garst ‘115 disclose the
invention as claimed with the exception of teaching a process of mixing aqueous
solutions of alkyl polyglycosides and polymeric anionic dispersants. Examiner’s answer,
page 5. The examiner relies on Moorer for a teaching of a process of mixing wetting
agents and dispersing agents together in solution and then drying them. Id., page 6.
According to the examiner, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the
time of the invention to have incorporated the teachings of Moorer into the invention of
the combined references to achieve the claimed invention because
a) Moorer et al. and the combined references are all directed to pesticides
comprising sulfonated lignins and nonionic surfactants/wetting agents; b)
Garst ('078) teaches that his composition can be formulated with or
without solvents such as water and that it is within the skill of the artisan to
determine specific amounts of adjuvants, such as solvents, to add to the
composition; c) Moorer et al. teach making a wetting-dispersing agent by
combining an aqueous mixture of a sulfonated lignin and a nonionic
wetting agent and then drying the mixture to form a single product; hence,
combining aqueous solutions of alkyl polyglycoside (nonionic
surfactant/wetting agent) and lignosulfonate and drying the mixture, would
be within the skill of one in the art.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007