Appeal No. 2006-0753
Application No. 09/682,010
calcination temperatures for preparing its zeolite, ZSM-5 in
hydrogen form. Thus, we concur with the examiner that it would
have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art
to determine workable or even optimum calcining temperatures,
such as those claimed, from the calcination temperature ranges
taught by Monque. In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1329, 65 USPQ2d
1379, 1382 (Fed. Cir. 2003)(“In cases involving overlapping
ranges, we and our predecessor court have consistently held that
even a slight overlap in range establishes a prima facie case of
obviousness (citation omitted).”); In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272,
276, 205 USPQ 215, 219 (CCPA 1980)(“[D]iscovery of an optimum
value of a result effective variable in a known process is
ordinarily within the skill of the art.”); In re Aller, 220 F.2d
454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)(“[W]here the general
conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not
inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine
experimentation.”).
The appellants argue that Monque does not teach that its
calcination of a zeolite, e.g., ZSM-5 in hydrogen form, be
carried out in the presence of a flowing gas, e.g., flowing air.
See the Brief, page 4, together with the specification, page 5.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007