Ex parte HOOVER et al. - Page 5




          Appeal No. 95-4199                                                           
          Application No. 08/068,445                                                   


          where R  and R  are selected from hydrogen, hydrocarbyl and3      4                                                              
          halogen-substituted hydrocarbyl; and                                         
               (3) an aromatic dicarboxylic acid halide having the                     
          structure                                                                    
                                   O    O                                              
                                    5      5                                           
                              X—————C——A——C—————X                                      

          where A is phenylene and X is chloro or bromo, in the presence               
          of sufficient aqueous alkali to maintain an alkaline pH and in               
          the presence of a substantially water-immiscible solvent; and                
          in the presence of                                                           
               (4) an effective molecular modifying amount of a                        
          monohydric phenol.                                                           
               The references of record relied upon by the examiner are:               
          Vaughn Jr.                    3,419,634            Dec. 31, 1968             
          Schmidt et al. (Schmidt)            4,681,922           Jul. 21,             
          1987                                                                         
          Okamoto                  0376052                   Jul. 04, 1990             
          (Published European Patent Application)                                      
               Claims 1 through 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103                
          as unpatentable over Schmidt in view of Okamoto and Vaughn Jr.               
               Having carefully considered the respective positions                    
          advanced by the appellants in the brief and the examiner in                  
          the answer, it is our conclusion that the above-noted                        
          rejection is not sustainable.  In rejecting claims under 35                  
          U.S.C. § 103 the examiner bears the initial burden of                        
                                           5                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007