Appeal 2007-2602
Application 10/797,975
not be motivated to combine a reference primarily directed to biocidal
fibrous articles with a reference directed to a beverage container, and that
there is no expectation of success for the use of the thermosetting technique
of Valyi in the compositions of Hagiwara." (Br. 5.)
“[W]hen the question is whether a patent claiming the combination of
elements of prior art is obvious” the relevant question is “whether the
improvement is more than the predictable use of prior art elements according
to their established functions.” KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct.
1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007). In addition, “[w]hen there is a
design need or market pressure to solve a problem and there are a finite
number of identified, predictable solutions, a person of ordinary skill has
good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp.
If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product ... of ordinary
skill and common sense.” Id. at 1742, 82 USPQ2d at 1397.
In the present case, we find that it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art to use a thermosetting process to make the zeolite
containing polymer article of Hagiwara. Hagiwara describes heating and
molding an article having a biocidal agent. Ando suggests that upon
heating, the low melting component of the resins spreads to cause more
zeolite particles to be exposed, which yields higher antibacterial activity on
the substrate. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been
motivated to solve the problem of obtaining enhanced bactericidal activity in
a resin article by heating it by a known thermosetting technique, an option
within their technical grasp, to expose more zeolite bactericidal agent on the
surface of the resin article.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013