Appeal No. 2004-0329 Page 18
Application No. 09/251,953
32-35. Moreover, by using such a tracking number, one can identify a particular
lot of grain and follow it though the production process to ensure that the proper
procedures, i.e., the procedure of obtaining certified seed as set forth by
Poehlman, which achieves a purity level of 99.5%, were followed to prevent
contamination with other grain products, such as grain produced using
genetically modified seeds. Montanari is thus not non-analogous art, and the
combination properly sets forth a prima facie case of obviousness, and the
rejection is affirmed.
OTHER ISSUES
The panel would like to make of record a discussion paper prepared by
the Canadian Grain Commission, published in December of 1998. The paper
discusses the issues involved in setting up an identity preservation (IP) system
for handling both large and small volume segregations of grain. See id. at 2.
One of the possible uses for such a system is the segregation of crops that have
genetically enhanced varieties, wherein genetically enhanced crops could be
provided to customers willing or wanting to recive such varieties, and the system
could also be used reassure customers that they are not inadvertently receiving
a genetically enhanced variety. See id. at 10. Included within the paper is a
suggestion from the Canadian Seed Growers’ Association, using as its basis
“[t]he pedigreed seed system [that] is a type of IP system that has been
functioning well for a long time.” Id. at 12.
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007