Appeal 2006-2439
Application 09/986,446
the second stage of filtering was to remove inclusions from the metal melt.
The cited prior art establishes that it was known that disposable cake filters,
and more complex filtering mechanism (deep-bed filters) were both suitable
for removing inclusions from metal melts. Persons of ordinary skill in the
art would have recognized the advantages and disadvantages of the various
filtering mechanisms such as the length of use of the various devices and
expense thereof. Consequently, a person of ordinary skill in the art would
have been motivated to perform the filtering process of Takayuki wherein
the second filtering stage employs a deep-bed filter, because it was known
that deep bed filters are suitable for removing inclusions from metal melts.
Knowledge generally available to one skilled in the art can provide the
motivation to combine the relevant teachings. Ashland Oil, Inc. v. Delta
Resins & Refractories, Inc., 776 F.2d 281, 297 n.24, 227 USPQ 657, 667
n.24 (Fed. Cir. 1985). The motivation to combine the relevant teachings of
references may come from knowledge of those skilled in the art that certain
references, or disclosures in the references, are known to be of special
interest or importance in the particular field. Pro Mold and Tool Co. v.
Great Lakes Plastics Inc., 75 F.3d 1568, 1573, 37 USPQ2d 1626, 1630 (Fed.
Cir. 1996).
Regarding, the rejection of claims 14-17 and 20-23 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as obvious over Takayuki, Gesing and Dove; and claims 18, 22,
and 23 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over J Takayuki, Gesing and
Walker, Appellants have not specifically challenged the Examiner's
motivation for combining the teachings of Dove and Walker with Takayuki
and Gesing. Rather, Appellants rely on the arguments presented in the
discussion of claim 12 (Br. 12-13). The Examiner has presented factual
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007