Appeal No. 1997-4099
Application No. 08/345,343
It is well established that the examiner has the initial burden under § 103 to establish
a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d
1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992); In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468, 1471-72, 223 USPQ 785,
787-88 (Fed. Cir. 1984). To that end, the examiner must show that some objective
teaching or suggestion in the applied prior art, or knowledge generally available in the art
would have led one of ordinary skill in the art to arrive at the claimed invention. Pro-Mold
& Tool Co. v. Great Lakes Plastics, Inc., 75 F.3d 1568, 1573, 37 USPQ2d 1626, 1630
(Fed. Cir. 1996).
Kondo discloses a process for producing a polyolefin in the presence of a catalyst
comprising a transition metal compound and an organometallic compound. (Column 3,
lines 20-25). The catalyst is composed of (A) the reaction product of (i) at least one
member selected from the group consisting of metal magnesium and a hydroxylated
organic compound, and oxygen-containing organic compounds of magnesium; (ii) at least
one oxygen-containing organic compound of titanium; (iii) at least one silicon compound;
and (iv) at least one halogenated aluminum compound; (B) at least one organometallic
compounds of metals of Groups Ia, IIa, IIb, IIIb, and IVb of the Periodic Table; and (C) at
least one kind of halogen-containing compound. (Column 3, lines 27-50). Kondo
discloses the halogenated aluminum compound can
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007