Appeal 2007-1397
Application 10/375,238
into a third composition, citing In re Kerkhoven, 626 F.2d 846, 850,
205 USPQ 1069, 1072 (CCPA 1980). Answer 4-5.
With respect to the second ground of rejection, the Examiner responds
the motivation to add Baeck’s lipoxidase to Perkins’ catalyst containing
composition is to combine the stain removing properties on carotenoid stains
of each, even though not for Appellants’ reasons. Answer 5-6. The
Examiner contends the references disclose similar compositions and the
combinations would lead to a third composition, citing Kerkhoven, 626 F.2d
at 850, 205 USPQ at 1072. Answer 6. The Examiner further contends
lipases form linoleic acid or salt thereof in an aqueous solution with textiles
stained with various fatty acids. Id.
The Examiner finds the data in the Specification with respect to
Experiments 1 and 1a “merely show what one or ordinary skill in the art
would expect and does not show any unexpected or superior results.”
Answer 7. The Examiner finds the “data shows that when lipoxygenase,
transition metal catalyst, and an enzyme are used in a composition, greater
bleaching occurs in comparison to those compositions containing less
bleaching agent or containing no enzyme which is what one skilled in the art
would expect from the teachings of the prior art.” Id. The Examiner further
finds the showing is not commensurate in scope with the claimed invention
because the results are based on one transition metal catalyst and the claims
are open to any transition metal catalyst for bleaching, and thus, it is not
unreasonable for Appellants to show results with respect to other bleach
catalysts. Id. 6-7.
We find Specification Examples 1 and 1a are based on the same
combination of Lipolase, Lipoxygenase, and transition metal catalyst, and
10
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013