Ex parte BURJES et al. - Page 2

          Appeal No. 95-0460                                                          
          Application 07/962,382                                                      

          other ortho to the hydroxy substituent by an alkylene or                    
          alkylidene bridge. The phenol moieties further contain a                    
          tertiary alkyl group of from 4 to about 8 carbon atoms in the               
          other ortho position, at least one aliphatic hydrocarbon group              
          containing at least 7 carbon atoms para to the hydroxy                      
          substituent, and are unsubstituted in the meta positions.  The              
          claimed compounds are antioxidants and are used in “minor”                  
          amounts in composition with natural and synthetic resins,                   
          rubbers, oils, normally liquid fuels and waxes.                             
               The references relied on2 by the examiner are:                         
          Sullivan                 2,796,444                Jun. 18, 1957             
          Beaver et al. (Beaver)   480,524                  Jan. 22, 1952             
               (Canadian Pat.)                                                        
               We have considered the following references made of                    
          record by appellants to the extent noted below:                             
          Filbey et al. (Filbey) 2,807,653                  Sep. 24, 1957             
          Knowles et al. (Knowles)      2,830,025                Apr.  8,             
          Godin et al. (Godin)     928,169                  Jun.  6, 1963             
               The examiner has rejected claims 1 through 12 and 37                   
          through 44 on appeal under 35 U.S.C. ' 112, first paragraph,                
          enablement, and second paragraph, as well as under 35 U.S.C.                
          '103 as being unpatentable over Beaver and Sullivan.  We                    
               Rather than reiterate the respective positions advanced                
          by the examiner and appellants, we refer to the examiner’s                  
          answer and to appellants’ brief for a complete exposition                   

          2  We observe that the examiner has listed the references made              
          of record by appellants in the IDS of July 15, 1994 (Paper No.              
          16) on page 2 of his answer but has not discussed or relied on              
          these references in the answer.                                             

                                        - 2 -                                         

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007