Appeal No. 2006-3151
Application No. 10/767,679
have not rebutted the prima facie case of obvious with evidence of
unexpectedly superior results.
For these reasons, we conclude that the Examiner has set forth a prima
facie case that claim 1 would have been obvious over Jokura in view of
Guenin, which Appellants have not rebutted. We therefore affirm the
rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Claims 4-10 fall with claim 1.
With regard to claim 2, the Examiner argues that Jokura “teaches that
the salt of the dicarboxylic acid can be formed by the addition of an alkali to
for[m] the aimed salt via neutralization in the system (see column 3,
lines 45-50, in particular), which would form a mixture of half-neutralized
and fully neutralized acid according to the amount of alkali added.”
(Answer 8.) In particular, the Examiner argues that “the ‘free acid,’
‘partially neutralized’ acid (formula I), and ‘fully neutralized[’] acid
(formula II), exist in solution in equilibrium with one another, with the
concentration of the different forms being governed by the individual Ka of
each ‘neutralization’ reaction.” (Answer 16.)
The Examiner also argues that “the ratio of partially neutralized acid
to fully neutralized acid will be dependent upon the concentration of H+ in
solution. In other words, the ratio of partially neutralized to fully neutralized
acid is governed by the pH of the solution.” (Answer 18 (emphasis in
original).) Thus, the Examiner concludes that “solutions having the same
pH should have the same or similar ratios of partially neutralized to fully
neutralized salts.” (Id.)
In addition, the Examiner states that Jokura “teaches that a desirable
pH range is from 3 to 10 and preferably from 3 to 9, and exemplifies
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013