Appeal No. 96-0008
Application 08/243,428
are self-evident. At page 2 in his declaration, Dr. Krespan
states that the Ohmori patents "provide enablement only for
the case in which n is 1." Dr. Krespan goes on to explain
that the reaction scheme disclosed by Ohmori to obtain the
epoxides is inherently limited to the production of the
intermediate where n=1, "since only in the case of an allyl
reactant can the I atom appear on the carbon adjacent to that
bearing the OH group, a prerequisite for ring-closure to the
three-membered epoxide ring (col., 3, line 60). Further
distancing the double bond from the OH moiety will necessarily
result in a larger ring, not the epoxide structure, where n
>1." In addition, declarant King, who holds a MS degree in
Chemistry, states that a search of Chemical Abstracts Services
and Beilstein's, On-line found the existence of no compounds
corresponding to the epoxide intermediate before the
dehalogenation step wherein n is 2 to 10.
We also cannot sustain the examiner's § 103 rejection to
the extent it is based upon the reasoning in the prior Board
decision regarding the admission found at page 2 of the
present specifi-
cation regarding the article to Rozen et al. According to
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007