Appeal 2007-0492
Application 10/810,960
1 31. Appellants assert that such membranes are used in a pressure-driven separation
2 process "at a pressure greater than atmospheric pressure, such as a pressure of at least
3 2 bara [bar absolute]." (Brief at 9, citing the Specification at 14, ll. 8–9.)
4 32. Appellants conclude that "the proposed combination would be inoperable to
5 achieve the at least 2 bara pressure required for the pressure-driven separation process
6 used in conjunction with an oxygen-selective membrane." (Brief at 9–10.)
7 33. With the exception of claims 45 and 48, which are discussed post, together with
8 claim 61, Appellants raise no other arguments about the separate patentability of any
9 dependent claims.
10 34. In particular, Appellants do not argue that the limitations of any of the dependent
11 claims would render the subject matter of the dependent claims patentable in the event
12 that the independent claims were obvious over the combined teachings of Okamoto and
13 St-Pierre.
14 35. Appellants cite no authority, whether testimony from a person knowledgeable in
15 the art, review articles, technical encyclopedias, or handbooks, in support of their
16 characterizations of the teachings of Okamoto or St-Pierre.
17 36. Moreover, Appellants do not address the level of ordinary skill in the art, nor do
18 they discuss what sorts of problems those of ordinary skill in the art are reasonably
19 expected to be able to solve.
-14-
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013