Appeal 2007-0125
Application 10/447,227
In other words, Aichinger employs aqueous alkali metal hydroxide solution,
not steam, to clean the parts of a (meth)acrylic ester (not acid) producing
apparatus and recovers no vapor phase from such apparatus for the purposes
of condensing and separating components in the vapor phase (Aichinger,
col. 3, ll. 1-55). Thus, even assuming that Ueoka explains that the
(meth)acrylic ester producing apparatus taught by Aichinger inherently
contains the same residues, organic solvent and polymer impurities as those
in a (meth)acrylic acid producing apparatus, we determine that the Examiner
has not demonstrated that Aichinger describes either inherently or expressly
each and every element of the invention recited in claim 1. Nor do we find
any identification of a reason on the part of the Examiner that would have
prompted a person of ordinary skill in the relevant field to employ the steam
distillation, condensation and separation steps recited in claim 1.
Accordingly, we are constrained to agree with the Appellants that on
this record, the Examiner has not established a prima facie case of
unpatentability under § § 102(b) or 103(a).
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013