Appeal No. 2004-1937
Application No. 09/086,033
4.5 to about 6.5 in a scrubber unit aqueous medium containing
sodium thiosulfate or potassium iodide. In response to the
appellant’s argument that Figure 4 of his drawing shows effective
abatement of fluorine containing compounds and fluorine in the
aforenoted pH range, the decision emphasized that Figure 4 is
based on Test 4 in Table 2 on specification page 13 and that Test
4 does not involve use of either sodium thiosulfate or potassium
iodide as required by the independent claims on appeal. As a
consequence, it was our determination that “the appellant’s
disclosure does not convey possession of the here claimed feature
wherein the recited pH range is maintained in an aqueous medium
which contains sodium thiosulfate or potassium iodide and
certainly does not convey the here claimed feature of injecting
sodium thiosulfate or potassium iodide in an amount to maintain
the pH range” (decision, page 6).
In the subject request, the appellant “agrees that Test 4
and the results shown in Figure 4 do not reflect an aqueous
solution with an enhancer [i.e., sodium thiosulfate or potassium
iodide]” (request, page 3). Nevertheless, the appellant argues
that “using the results of Test 4, one skilled in the art can
determine an effective pH range and subsequently determine what
necessary enhancers are required to maintain this pH range for
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007