Appeal 2006-1749
Application 10/300,205
Appellants further argue that “Goss and Kent cannot be combined to
arrive at the present invention” (Reply Br. 3). Goss uses an inert cellulose
substrate which is treated with multiple adhesives to produce a clumpable
litter, whereas Kent uses a grain-based substrate which itself tends to clump
without the adhesive layers (Reply Br. 1, 3). Appellants also allege that one
of ordinary skill would not be motivated to specifically select citrus pulp
from the long list of materials Goss discloses (Reply Br. 3). Moreover,
Appellants argue Goss’ disclosure, that “fibril” formation on the surface of
the cellulosic substrates is detrimental to clumping, is “antithetical” to the
clumpable litter teachings of Kent (Reply Br. 3). Based on these arguments,
Appellants conclude that there is no motivation to combine Goss with Kent
(Reply Br. 3).
We agree with the Examiner’s ultimate determination that claim 50 is
unpatentable over Kent in view of Goss.
Kent discloses an animal litter made of a grain germ sorbent,
preferably corn germ (Kent, col. 3, ll. 23-26), although any “suitable part of
the grain” may be used to derive the sorbent (Kent, col. 3, ll. 21-22). The
animal litter preferably contains a “cohesiveness agent to enhance the
cohesiveness of the animal litter granules” (Kent, col. 4, ll. 1-4). The
“cohesiveness agent” is a polysaccharide and is used to “effect” the
intraparticle adhesion/cohesion of the granules (Kent, col. 4, ll. 13-14, 22-
24). The polysaccharide adhesive may be a starch (Kent, col. 4, ll. 16).
Goss discloses an animal litter made of cellulosic granule sorbent
(Goss, col. 2, ll. 58-67, col. 3, ll. 1-6) with a polysaccharide adhesive and a
clumping agent (Goss, col. 3, ll. 10-11, 43-46). The cellulosic granule may
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007