Ex parte WEBER et al. - Page 2




          Appeal No. 94-3251                                                          
          Application 08/071,690                                                      



               The subject matter of the appealed claims relates to a two-            
          step process for the preparation of an amine.  Claim 1, the only            
          independent claim, is illustrative of the appealed claims and               
          reads as follows:                                                           
               1.  A process for the preparation of an amine of the formula           
          CH -NH-CH -R, wherein R is an aliphatic radical having 1 to 3               
            3     2                                                                   
          carbon atoms, comprising a first reaction of an aldehyde of the             
          formula R-CHO with an amine of the formula R'-NH , wherein R' is            
                                                          2                           
          a straight or branched chain aliphatic radical having 6 to 12               
          carbon atoms, to produce a Schiff base and water of reaction,               
          removal of said water, and a second reaction of said base with              
          methylamine and hydrogen in the presence of a hydrogenation                 
          catalyst.                                                                   

               As indicated on page 3 of appellants' brief, the claims                
          stand or fall together.  Accordingly, we will limit our                     
          consideration to claim 1 in considering the examiner's rejection            
          of the appealed claims.                                                     
               The reference relied on by the examiner is :                           
          Terada         44-20322 (Japan)              September 2, 1969              
               Claims 1-22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as                    
          unpatentable over Terada.  We have carefully considered                     
          appellants' position as set forth in the appeal brief and the               
          examiner's position as set forth in his answer, and we have                 
          decided that we will not sustain the rejection.                             



                                          2                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007