Appeal 2007-2124
Application 10/175,515
in combination with sodium hydroxide is an inorganic layered hydroxide.
Because no evidence has been provided, we find that the Examiner failed to
meet his burden in establishing that Ehrhardt’s tungsten compound satisfies
the claimed limitation of an inorganic layered hydroxide.
Ehrhardt also teaches that, in acidifying the basic tungsten trioxide
solution with an acid solution comprising zirconyl ions, zirconium
hydroxide may form and “remain associated” with the zirconyl tungstate
matrix (Ehrhardt, col. 3, ll. 24-27 and 6-68; col. 4, ll. 5-29; Findings of Fact
6-9). Once again, we find no evidence in the record to provide a reason for
believing that the zirconyl matrix comprising zirconium hydroxide has the
specific structure of an inorganic layered hydroxide compound as required
by claim 1.
Furthermore, the Examiner has also given no reason for persons of
skill in the art to have modified Ehrhardt’s compound to produce a inorganic
layered hydroxide in the scope of the claim. See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex
Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1741, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007) (Obviousness
requires a “a reason that would have prompted a person of ordinary skill in
the relevant field” to have modified the prior art “in the way the claimed
new invention does.”)
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013