Appeal No. 1997-1793
Application No. 08/528,044
produced mixed oxide TiO PF .” Also, it is not clear whether
2 2
the phrase “pyrogenically produced” is indicative of the
production process as broadly recited in appealed claim 2 or
claim 3. Similarly, it is not certain whether the comparative
mixed oxide is in fact made by a process which corresponds to
the process as described in Hattori. The examiner and the
appellants should fully explore these issues.
2. JP ‘825:
With respect to JP ‘825, which was published on December
14, 1993, the examiner should first determine whether the
document qualifies as prior art against the claimed subject
matter. In this regard, we initially note that the present
application is a continuation of Application No. 08/181,426
filed on January 14, 1994. However, we also observe that the
appellants have claimed priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119 to
German Patent Application No. P 43 02 896.9 filed February 2,
1993. Although the examiner has indicated on the face of the
file wrapper that the appellants have met the conditions of 35
U.S.C. § 119, we do not find an accurate English language
translation of the priority document pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.55
(1997) in the record. Nor do we find any entry in the
17
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007