Appeal No. 95-2063
Application 07/965,314
Thus, the claim does not mandate an upper limit of 85% by volume
of alcohol.
Finally, the examiner urges that the recitation of “‘balance
of water, not to exceed 10% by volume of the composition’ recited
in claim 12 is incorrect.” Answer, p. 5. In addition, the
examiner urges that “in claim 16, the phrase ‘balance water, not
to exceed 5% by volume of the composition’ is proven incorrect.”
Answer, p. 6. It appears that these rejections are a holdover
from rejections made on pp. 5-6 in the first office action,
mailed July 2, 1993 in Paper No. 6. The examiner has overlooked
the appellant’s amendment filed September 13, 1993 in Paper No. 7
wherein these phrases were deleted from the referenced claims.
Since the contested phrases are no longer in claims 12 and 16,
and no other claims have been rejected for these reasons, we
consider this issue to be moot.
Accordingly, Rejection II is reversed.
The decision of the examiner is affirmed-in-part.
0.2% of TEOS and nitric acid, respectively, are encompassed by
the claim.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007