Appeal No. 95-1798
Application 07/397,415
through 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over the
combined disclosures of DeBoer and Bertoni.
DELIBERATIONS
Our deliberations in this matter have included evaluation
and review of the following materials: (1) the instant
specification, including all of the claims on appeal; (2)
appellants’ main Brief and Reply Brief before the Board; (3) the
Examiner’s Answer and Supplemental Answer; and (4) the DeBoer and
Bertoni references relied on by the examiner.
On consideration of the record, including the above-listed
materials, we reverse the examiner’s rejections under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, second paragraph, and 35 U.S.C. § 103.
SECTION 112
Claims 5 through 7, 10 and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, second paragraph, as indefinite. According to the
examiner, the processes recited in these claims “are incomplete
in that no reaction conditions (such as solvent, heat or
catalyst) has [sic] been set forth.” See the Examiner’s Answer,
page 4. We disagree.
As stated in Ex parte Jackson, 217 USPQ 804, 806 (Bd. App.
1982),
[c]laims 2 to 6 have been finally rejected under the
second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 as being
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007