Appeal 2007-1483
Application 10/344,390
Second, although a lower iron content was observed using a low
sulfur fuel and a low phosphorus lubricating oil, the Appellants have failed
to establish that this lower iron content was significant and unexpected,
especially in view of the fact that low phosphorus lubricating oils having
antioxidant and anti-wear properties were known in the art. See In re
Freeman, 474 F.2d 1318, 1324, 177 USPQ 139, 143 (CCPA 1973) (a
showing of “unexpected results” must establish that the difference actually
obtained would not have been expected by one skilled in the art); In re
D’Ancicco, 439 F.2d 1244, 1248, 169 USPQ 303, 306 (CCPA 1971)
(appellants failed to rebut prima facie case of obviousness where asserted
differences between claimed foams and prior art foams were not shown to be
significant).
Based on the record before us, it is reasonable to conclude that
Waddoups in combination with Lesieur or Welstand render obvious the
method of claim 11.
Claims 13-29 stand with claim 11.
2. Rejection of claims 11 and 13-29 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Colclough 579 or
Colclough 580 in combination with Lesieur or Welstand
The Examiner finds that Colclough 579 and Colclough 580 disclose
crankcase lubricating oil compositions suitable for use in automobile engines
containing less than 0.05 weight percent phosphorus, preferably less than
0.01 weight percent phosphorus. The Examiner finds that Colclough 579
and Colclough 580 do not disclose that the lubricating oil compositions are
used in conjunction with a gasoline fuel having a sulfur content less than 10
ppm by weight. However, the Examiner finds that any well-known gasoline
fuel may be used in the automobile engine disclosed in Colclough 579 and
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013