Appeal No. 2006-1750 Παγε 9
Application No. 10/435,175
in the art would have readily recognized that the impregnations
could be conducted serially or simultaneously based on the
combined teachings of Grosch and Muller. After all skill, and
not the converse, is presumed on the part of those practicing in
the art. See In re Sovish, 769 F.2d 738, 743, 226 USPQ 771, 774
(Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Jacoby, 309 F.2d 513, 516, 135 USPQ 317,
319 (CCPA 1962).
Appellants note the generic addition methods for catalyst
modifiers as set forth in the applied references (brief, page 6),
as if the other addition options disclosed therein detract from
the teaching of impregnation set forth in Grosch and Muller.
Such an argument is clearly unpersuasive in that the disclosure
of each of the limited number of addition options set forth in
the applied references, including impregnation, are clear and
instructive to one of ordinary skill in the art as to how to add
a metal promoter. Certainly, these teachings are not destructive
Also, see the teachings of Grosch at column 8, line 62 through
column 9, line 15 and as further referred to herein and in the
answer.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007