Appeal 2007-4099
Application 09/962,935
Kahn, 441 F.3d 977, 988, 78 USPQ2d 1329, 1336-37 (Fed. Cir. 2006); see
also DyStar Textilfarben GmBH & Co. Deutschland KG v. C.H. Patrick Co.,
464 F.3d 1356, 1361, 80 USPQ2d 1641, 1645 (Fed. Cir. 2006)(“The
motivation need not be found in the references sought to be combined, but
may be found in any number of sources, including common knowledge, the
prior art as a whole, or the nature of the problem itself.”); In re Bozek,
416 F.2d 1385, 1390, 163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969)(“Having
established that this knowledge was in the art, the examiner could then
properly rely, as put forth by the solicitor, on a conclusion of obviousness
‘from common knowledge and common sense of the person of ordinary skill
in the art without any specific hint or suggestion in a particular reference.’”).
As evidence of obviousness of the subject matter defined by claims 7,
8, 20, and 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), the Examiner has again relied on the
disclosure of Klabunde. Certain aspects of the relevant disclosures of
Klabunde are discussed above. We find that Klabunde further discloses
obtaining particles having a BET surface area within the range recited in
claim 7 (col. 6, Table 1). We also find that Klabunde teaches employing
iron oxides particles which are inclusive of the iron oxide pigment recited in
claim 8. Compare Klabunde, col. 2, ll. 21-22, with Specification 10-11. We
find that Klabunde teaches that it is desirable to form agglomerated particles
useful for both the liquid and gaseous environment (col. 3, ll. 19-25). Thus,
we concur with the Examiner that it is well within the ambit of one of
ordinary skill in the art to determine optimum abrasion values in liquid
(water), such as those recited in claim 20, for agglomerated particles having
the claimed BET surface areas and iron oxides (inclusive of iron oxide
pigment). In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936-37
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013