Appeal No. 2006-2369 Page 12
Application No. 10/169,618
polysaccharide urethane derivative is then washed in the precipitating solvent and dried.
Id., at [0020] (“After carrying out settlings . . . the . . . methanol washed them several
times and they carried out reduced pressure drying . . . .”).
Thus, Example 1 of Sony ‘649 discloses making a polysaccharide urethane
derivative by (1) reacting a polysaccharide with an isocyanate in the presence of an
inert solvent, (2) precipitating the product by adding the reaction medium to a
precipitating solvent (methanol) under stirring; (3) isolating and washing the precipitated
product with additional precipitating solvent; and (4) drying the product. Example 1 of
Sony ‘649 differs from claim 14 only in that claim 14 recites the use of a starch
hydrolysate as the polysaccharide moiety, and an isocyanate having a linear or
branched alkyl group as the isocyanate moiety.
However, as discussed supra, Sony ‘649 discloses, at paragraph [0007], that
starch hydrolysates are useful in the preparation of the disclosed polysaccharide
urethane derivatives, and that hydrolysates of relatively high molecular weights are
“especially . . . suitable.” Moreover, as also discussed supra, Sony ‘775, at [0012]
discloses that the linear isocyanate octyl isocyanate is useful in preparing
polysaccharide urethane derivatives having utility in coatings for video photographic
paper. Therefore, in our view, by following the teachings of Sony ‘649 and ‘775, one of
ordinary skill would have recognized that the claimed ingredients would have been
useful to prepare the claimed compound using the claimed sequence of process steps.
We therefore agree with the examiner that one of ordinary skill in the art would have
considered process claim 14 obvious.
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013