Appeal 2007-2985
Application 010/669,978
1 7. Appeal Brief dated 22 September 2006 (numerous appeal
2 briefs have been filed to apparently overcome various informalities; the only
3 appeal brief we have considered is the Appeal Brief filed 22 September
4 2006.)
5 8. The Examiner’s Answer entered 17 November 2006.
6 9. Reply Brief dated 17 January 2007.
7 10. The Tsao patent relied upon by the Examiner.
8 11. PTO bibliographic data sheet for the application on appeal
9 12. Claims 1-15 on appeal as set out in the Amendment filed
10 13 April 2006.
11
12 C. Issues
13 The principal issue on appeal is whether Haas has sustained its burden
14 of showing that the Examiner erred in rejecting the claims on appeal as
15 being unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Tsao.
16
17 D. Findings of fact
18 The following findings of fact are believed to be supported by a
19 preponderance of the evidence. To the extent that a finding of fact is a
20 conclusion of law, it may be treated as such. Additional findings as
21 necessary may appear in the Discussion portion of the opinion.
22 The invention
23 The invention relates to aqueous hydrogen peroxide solutions
24 (1) characterized by a maximum amount of alkali metals, alkaline earth
25 metals and amines and (2) said to be suitable for epoxidation of olefins.
26 Specification ¶¶ 0002 and 0021.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013