Appeal No. 2004-2026
Application No. 09/793,652
range achieves unexpected results relative to the prior
art range. [Citations omitted].
On this record, the appellant does not argue, much less refer to,
any factual evidence showing that the claimed range imparts
unexpected results relative to the range described in Holtinger.
See the Brief and the Reply Brief in their entirety.
In any event, Lachenal teaches employing the temperature and
time period embraced by the claimed formula in the acid-treatment
of the type3 discussed in Holtinger. Compare Lachenal’s Table at
page 147 showing an actual experiment employing a temperature of 90
oC for a time period of 120 minutes with the appellants’ Figure 1
representing the claimed formula. According to Lachenal referring
to the above actual experimentation, “raising the temperature in
the acid-treatment step [at a time period of 120 minutes] results
in a further decrease of kappa No...” See page 147. Contrary to
the appellants’ argument, the fact that Lachenal at page 150 also
mentions employing 60 to 80 OC does not negate the actual
experiment and teaching discussed above.
Thus, we determine that one of ordinary skill in the art would
have been led to use the temperature and time embraced by the
3 As urged by the appellant (Brief, page 6), the acid
treatment described in Lachenal, like that described in
Holtinger, is used to remove transition metals.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007