Appeal No. 2005-1104
Application No. 09/795,211
of appellants’ invention to use Natalase® enzyme for the advantages
taught by Markussen in place of the alpha-amylase enzyme in the
detergent composition of B-F ‘562 (Answer, page 6). We agree.
Appellants argue that Markussen does not cure the deficiencies
of B-F ‘562 (Brief, page 15). For reasons discussed above and in
the Answer, we determine that B-F ‘562 discloses all components of
the claimed composition and process and therefore this argument is
not well taken.
Appellants argue that Markussen fails to disclose the claimed
composition (Brief, page 16). This argument is not persuasive
since Markussen was not relied upon to show the claimed composition
but merely to establish the advantages of using Natalase® as an
alpha-amylase enzyme in detergent compositions.
We note that the showing of unexpected results on page 12 of
the specification is still not persuasive of non-obviousness even
though claims 11 and 17 are commensurate in scope with the enzyme
used in the comparisons, for the additional reasons discussed
above.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007