Appeal 2007-1375
Application 10/327,300
According to Appellants, the invention is directed to an aerogel
having a specified pore volume, with metallic particles such as platinum
dispersed on a surface of the aerogel in an amount of at least 10 wt.% with
an average particle size of about 2.5 nanometers or less (Supp. Reply Br.
2).1 The claims on appeal are reproduced below:
33. A composition comprising an aerogel having a pore volume of at least
0.5 cm3/g, as determined using a nitrogen adsorption/desorption technique or
equivalent, and metallic particles dispersed on a surface of said aerogel such
that said composition comprises at least 10 wt. % of metallic particles based
on the total weight of the composition, wherein said metallic particles
include platinum and wherein said metallic particles having an average
particle diameter of about 2.5 nanometers or less.
34. The composition of claim 33, wherein said aerogel is a carbon aerogel.
The Examiner has relied on the following references as evidence of
unpatentability:
Hammerschmidt US 6,010,798 Jan. 4, 2000
Siyu Ye et al. (hereafter Ye), “A new electrocatalyst consisting of a
molecularly homogeneous platinum-aerogel nanocomposite,” 75 Can. J.
Chem., 1666-1673 (1997)
Maldonado-Hódar et al. (hereafter Maldonado), “Synthesis and textural
characteristics of organic aerogels, transition-metal-containing organic
aerogels and their carbonized derivatives,” 37 Carbon 1199-1205 (1999)
1 We note that two Supplemental Reply Briefs have been submitted by
Appellants, dated Nov. 9, 2006 and Nov. 13, 2006, respectively. These
Supplemental Reply Briefs appear to be duplicates. We will refer to and cite
from the Supplemental Reply Brief dated Nov. 9, 2006.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013