Ex parte ZISMAN - Page 11




               Appeal No. 97-3640                                                                                                  
               Application No. 08/406,272                                                                                          


                       problem with this approach is that the water vapor from the solution is introduced into                     
                       the ethylene, thus necessitating zeolite water-absorption beds which (i) would be large                     
                       and costly to install; and (ii) would be expensive to regenerate.  (col. 2, lines 24-45)                    

               Accordingly, Jones removes trace amounts of carbon dioxide from olefin gases by passing the gas                     

               through an essentially non-aqueous liquid solution of alkali or alkaline earth metal hydroxides and/or              

               weak acid salts and certain selected liquid polyhydric alcohols (abstract).  In cases where the ethylene            

               feed also contains trace amounts of water, a potassium-based system eliminates the need for water-                  

               removing adsorbents or at least reduces their size considerably (col. 14, lines 25-34).                             

                       According to the examiner,                                                                                  

                              [i]t would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the                     
                       invention was made to have contacted a fluid comprising ethylene, CO  and water with                        
                                                                                               2                                   
                       a soda-lime product such as is disclosed in McKernan, in order to remove CO ,                               
                                                                                                      2                            
                       because McKernan teaches that CO  should be removed from ethylene in order not to                           
                                                           2                                                                       
                       poison downstream catalysts, and because Jones  teaches that there exist fluids                             
                       comprising CO , water, and ethylene from which CO  should be removed prior to2                                    2                                                     
                       catalytic polymerization into polyethylene.                                                                 
                              With respect to the weight ratio of CO  to fluid recited in claim 23, note that                      
                                                                      2                                                            
                       Jones teaches CO  as being present in 10-25 ppm (col. 2, lines 24-25), which falls into                     
                                         2                                                                                         
                       the broad range claimed.  (Ans. page 6, last two paragraphs)                                                

                       Appellant argues neither McKernan, nor Jones, nor the combination of McKernan and Jones,                    

               disclose or suggest (i) contacting a water-containing fluid with a substantially solid composition (Br.             

               page 12, last paragraph) or (ii) the positive step of adding water to an olefin fluid to improve CO2                

               removal and contacting the resulting water-containing fluid with a composition such as soda lime (Br.               

               page 13, paragraph two).  Appellant submits the examiner not only continues to ignore the step of                   

                                                             Page 11                                                               





Page:  Previous  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007