Kulling, In re

Citation897 F.2d 1147,14 USPQ2d 1056
Decision Date08 March 1990
Docket NumberNo. 89-1516,89-1516
PartiesIn re Achim M. KULLING and Helmut H. Steinhausen.
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Robert G. Mukai, Burns, Doane, Swecker & Mathis, of Alexandria, Va., argued, for appellant.

Harris A. Pitlick, Associate Sol., Office of the Sol., of Arlington, Va., argued for appellee. With him on the brief was Fred E. McKelvey, Sol.

Before NIES, Circuit Judge, BENNETT, Senior Circuit Judge, and ARCHER, Circuit Judge.

ARCHER, Circuit Judge.

Achim M. Kulling and Helmut H. Steinhausen (Kulling) appeal the decision of the United States Patent Office (PTO) Board of Patent Appeals & Interferences (Board) affirming the examiner's rejection under 35 U.S.C. Sec. 103 (1982 & Supp. II 1984) of all

24 claims of their patent application. We affirm.

Background

Claim 1 1 of Kulling's patent application is directed to a process for the treatment of a dilute iron (II) sulfate-containing sulfuric acid solution resulting from the hydrolysis of a titanyl sulfate solution in the production of titanium dioxide. The process is intended to achieve a high recovery of sulfuric acid while minimizing the amount of recovered contaminants (metal sulfates, chromium and vanadium) so that acid may be recycled for further titanium dioxide production.

The treatment process is basically comprised of five steps:

(a) concentrating the dilute iron (II) sulfate-containing sulfuric acid solution to obtain a suspension of the precipitated metal sulfate in sulfuric acid;

(b) centrifuging the suspension in a screen centrifuge to separate the precipitated sulfates from the acid solution;

(c) pre-washing the retained solids with 2 to 4% by volume of the feed solution to step (a) with respect to the volume of the original suspension;

(d) washing the retained solids with 1 to 2% by volume of water with respect to the volume of the original suspension; and

(e) recycling the filtrates of washing steps (c) and (d) either for use in the production of titanium dioxide and/or the solution treatment process.

The examiner rejected Kulling's claims on the basis of Christensen, United States Patent No. 2,001,409, in view of any one of several secondary references. In his Examiner's Answer, the examiner described Christensen as follows:

Christensen discloses the treatment of liquors from the production of TiO2 from ilmenite ores starting on page 8 column 1, line 53 to page 9 column 1, lines [sic] 38 which is discussed inconjunction [sic] with his figure 6. In this process the acidic iron sulfate solution formed by the hydrolysis in 35 and separated in 37 is supplied to concentrator 38 where it is concentrated to form ferrous sulfate slurried in 60% acid. This 60% slurry is then separated into a filtrate and a cake in 39 and 40. A portion of the separated 60% acid from 39 or 40 may be returned to the concentrator to secure a fluid pulp which can be efficiently handled by the apparatus. The cake is washed on item 40 to remove residual acid on the cake using a combination of iron sulfate containing solutions and wash liquor. Christensen page 5 column 2, lines 15-20 states that item 40 can be either a filter or a centrifuge and washing can be done in both types of apparatus.

Accordingly Christensen fairly shows the overall combination of the instant claims to include the concentration of the same feed solution, separation by centrifuging of the solids from the concentrated solution, washing of the separated solids using a plural wash, and recycle of the filtrates from the centrifuging to the concentrator which is part of the treatment of the solution and also recycle of the separated concentrated acid to the production of titanium dioxide.

Christensen does not show the specific use of a portion of the feed liquor to the concentrator to wash the filter cake although one of the wash liquors used by Christensen is an [sic] ferrous sulfate solution as is the feed solution to the concentrator. Christensen also does not specifically recite the numerical quantities of wash liquors used in the instant claims.

Notwithstanding these deficiencies of Christensen's disclosure, the examiner concluded that the claimed invention would have been obvious to one of skill in the art because the secondary references, Miller (U.S. Patent No. 3,273,959), Arnold, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 4,291,002), Hellmers, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 3,260,567), and Pike (U.S. Patent No. 2,798,790), disclosed the "use of a portion of the feed solution to wash the centrifuge cake" and because [t]he determination of the precise amount [of] wash solution and water used in the wash is a matter of routine optimization obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art balancing normal considerations of the purity of the washed cake required, the loss of cake via dissolution into the wash liquor. Increased washing increases the purity of the cake, the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
119 cases
  • Ex parte NewRiver, Inc.
    • United States
    • Patent Trial and Appeal Board
    • 30 Agosto 2012
    ...nexus to support patentability because the evidence would not be commensurate in scope with what is claimed. See e.g., In re Kulling, 897 F.2d at 1149 (objective evidence must be commensurate in scope with the invention claimed); Siolundv. Musland, 847 F.2d 1573, 1582 (Fed. Cir. 1988)(the l......
  • Masterimage 3D, Inc. v. Realdinc
    • United States
    • Patent Trial and Appeal Board
    • 14 Abril 2016
    ...of nonobviousness also must be commensurate in scope with the claims for which the evidence is offered to support. In re Kulling, 897 F.2d 1147, 1149 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Lintner, 458 F.2d 1013, 1015 (CCPA 1972); In re Tiffin, 448 F.2d 791, 791-92 (CCPA 1971) (holding that evidence direc......
  • Pfizer, Inc. v. Apotex, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Federal Circuit
    • 22 Marzo 2007
    ...inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.'" (quoting Aller, 220 F.2d at 456)); In re Kulling, 897 F.2d 1147, 1149 (Fed.Cir.1990) (finding no clear error in Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences' conclusion that the amount of eluent to be used in a ......
  • Ex parte Hanchett
    • United States
    • Patent Trial and Appeal Board
    • 22 Marzo 2006
    ... ... is simply not commensurate with the scope of the claimed sago ... starch containing compositions encompassed by the claims and ... the range of compositions taught by Eden. See generally, ... In re Kulling , 897 F.2d 1147, 1149-50, 14 U.S.P.Q.2d ... 1056, 1058 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Grasselli , 713 ... F.2d 731, 743, 218 U.S.P.Q. 769, 778-79 (Fed. Cir. 1983); ... In re Clemens , 622 F.2d 1029, 1035-36, 206 U.S.P.Q ... 289, 295-96 (CCPA 1980); In re Kerkhoven , 626 F.2d ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT