Ex Parte Graydon et al - Page 8

             Appeal No. 2007-0294                                                          Page 8               
             Application No. 11/050,224                                                                         

             weight ratio of greater than about 5:1.  Both these surfactant compounds, with                     
             overlapping alkyl chain lengths, are disclosed in Brockett.  Brockett at 18, ll. 1-5.              
             The Examiner argues that Brockett exemplifies combinations of two anionic                          
             different surfactants, but not the same combination which is recited in claim 10.                  
             Answer 6.  However, the Examiner asserts “that, where both anionics are disclosed                  
             as suitable, the person of ordinary skill in the surfactant art could formulate                    
             compositions as recited by appellant by working within the general teachings of                    
             the reference.”  Id.                                                                               
                   Appellants challenge the rejection, arguing that Brockett                                    
                   not only fail[s] to disclose the anionic detersive surfactants recited in                    
                   claim 10, but fail[s] to disclose the use of such anionic detersive                          
                   surfactants together in a detergent composition. The Examiner’s                              
                   assertion that where combinations of anionics are disclosed as                               
                   suitable, a person of ordinary skill in surfactant art could formulate                       
                   compositions as recited by Appellant by working within the general                           
                   teachings of the reference, is “hindsight recognition or at best . . .                       
                   obvious to try”, In re Geiger, 2 U.S.P.Q.2d 1276, 1278 (C.A.F.C.                             
                   1987).                                                                                       
             Reply Br. 5.                                                                                       
                   We agree with the Examiner that choice of surfactants would have been                        
             obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made.               
             As stated by the Examiner, Brockett discloses the specifically claimed surfactants,                
             as well as mixtures of surfactants, albeit not a mixture of the two which are                      
             instantly claimed.  Answer 3.  Brockett also states that “[m]any suitable detergent                
             active compounds [surfactants] are available and fully described in the literature.”               
             Brockett at 17, ll. 24-27.  It is reasonable to presume from this statement, and                   
             similar disclosure in the instant specification (7: 25 to 9: 18), that surfactants and             
             their cleaning properties were well known in the prior art.  Consequently, it                      
             appears that all Appellants have done is to select a combination of known                          



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013