Prior art must teach all the elements for obviousness

Ex parte ROGER B. QUINCY, III and JOHN G. MACDONALD (BPAI)
Appeal 2009-0441
Application 10/328,730
Technology Center 1600
Decided: February 26, 2009

25. A substrate that contains an odor control composition in an amount of from about 0.5 wt.% to about 25 wt.% of the substrate, wherein said odor control composition comprises a silicon oxide compound and a transition metal that constitutes from about 0.2 wt.% to about 10 wt.% of said odor control composition,

wherein said silicon oxide compound is formed from a silicon source and a cyclodextrin template.

The Examiner argued that a composition with a chelating agent is the same as a metal ion because it can chelate metal. The Board thankfully disagreed. The reference “[s]uitable odor control agents also include chelating agents typically suitable to chelate metal ions like iron and manganese.” (FF3.) [The reference] did not say that metal ions are odor control agents. [The Reference] taught making an odor control composition with a chelating agent, but did not teach making a composition with the metal ion a chelating agent could bind. [The reference] also did not teach using a “chelate” of agent and metal as the Examiner argues..."Put another way, the cited prior art did not contain all the elements of the claimed composition. The Office’s case for obviousness did not account for the differences."

Case can be found here