Appeal No. 2007-0175 Page 4
Application No. 10/467,134
obvious matter of process optimization to one skilled in the art, depending on the
specific wastewater treated and results desired, absent a sufficient showing of
unexpected results.”
In response appellant asserts (Brief, page 3) that Binot differs from the
claimed invention by teaching that wastewater is degreased “by an air flotation
process.” In contrast, the claimed invention requires that wastewater be
degreased “without employing flotation degreasing means.” Id. Regarding Vion,
appellant asserts that Vion “teaches the same technology as does Binot”,
specifically that “grease particles are removed by flotation degreasing means.”
Brief, page 4.
While appellant recognizes that Vion’s process “includes coagulation,
flocculation, and sedimentation”; appellant asserts that this process “is utilized
continuously to remove contaminants other than grease particles.” Id. To
emphasize his point, appellant directs attention to the four step process outlined
in column 4 of Vion. Brief, page 4. According to appellant, the separation of
grease particles begins at step 3 of the process. Brief, page 5. As appellant
explains (id.), “[t]o separate the grease particles from the wastewater and flocs
formed, the process urges the grease particles to the surface of the wastewater.”
In this regard, appellant points out that Vion discloses that “in order to accelerate
the rate of rise of the grease particles, it is possible to inject fine air bubbles . . . .”
Id., see also Vion, column 4, lines 35-38. Highlighting the use of a floatation
degreasing means, appellant explains that “[d]uring the fourth step [disclosed by
Vion] grease particles are removed from the surface of the wastewater.” Id., see
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013