Appeal 97-1458
Application 08/329,940
Scarbrough, 500 F.2d 560, 182 USPQ 298 (CCPA 1974). In any
event, there is no mention in Flynn of C F NO sold as PF-5052
5 11
by 3M. So basically, Flynn supports neither the applicants'
argument nor the examiner's rationale.
We have undertaken a brief search on the Automated Patent
System of the Patent and Trademark Office by searching for
C F NO. We found the following patents, which may or may not
5 11
shed light on the matter:
(1) Rice, U.S. Patent 3,882,193 (1975), which at
col. 6, lines 31-32 describes the compound "C F NO (sold under
5 11
the trademark FC-78)" but does not say who owns the trademark.
(2) Owens, U.S. Patent 5,162,384 (1992), which at
col. 4, lines 4-17, describes compounds having the same
formula set out in Flynn, supra. The compounds are referred
to as perfluorinated N-aliphatic morpholines (not as
perfluoronitroalkanes). Owens is mentioned in Flynn at col.
2, lines 39-41.
(3) Hinden, U.S. Patent 5,535,925 (1996; filed
1995), which at col. 4, lines 23-26 mentions C F NO sold as
5 11
PF-5052 by Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Corporation,
which we understand is now 3M.
- 13 -
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007