Ex Parte VERDUIJN et al - Page 2




          Appeal No. 2000-1808                                                        
          Application No. 07/855,016                                                  


                               APPEALED SUBJECT MATTER                                
               Claim 1 is representative of the subject matter on appeal              
          and reads as follows:                                                       
                    1.  A process for reforming a petroleum hydrocarbon               
               feed stream comprising contacting the stream under reforming           
               conditions with a catalyst which comprises a zeolite KL in             
               which the Zeolite crystals are cylindrical and have an                 
               average cylinder wall length of 0.1 to 0.6 microns, and an             
               average cylinder wall length:diameter ratio of less than 0.5           
               and have microscopically flat basal planes, said Zeolite               
               being the crystallization product of a mixture comprising q            
               moles of water, a divalent cation, said divalent cation                
               present in said mixture and present at a level of up to 250            
               ppm, a source of m moles of K2O, a source of n moles of SiO2           
               and a source of p moles of AL2O3 where m:n is 0.2 to 0.35              
               and n:p is 15 to 160 and q:m is 45 to 70, which zeolite is             
               further impregnated with a metal hydrogenation-                        
               dehydrogenation promotor, wherein the basal planes of said             
               cylindrical crystals are flatter than the basal planes of              
               crystals prepared from an otherwise identical synthesis                
               mixture which is free of said divalent cation.                         
                                      PRIOR ART                                       
               In support of his rejections, the examiner relies on the               
          following prior art references:                                             
          Drehman et al. (Drehman)      3,883,418           May  13, 1975             
          Wortel                        4,544,539           Oct.  1, 1985             
          Buss                          4,645,586           Feb. 24, 1987             
          Ellig et al. (Ellig)          4,870,223           Sep. 26, 1989             
          Verduijn                      5,491,119           Feb. 13, 1996             
                              (filed June 30, 1992)1                                  

               1 The published PCT application corresponding to this patent           
          may be available as “prior art” under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a).  Upon             
          return of this application, the examiner is advised to determine            
          whether the published PCT application, WO91/06367, is available             
                                          2                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007