Ex parte HORST WENZLER - Page 3

          Appeal No. 95-4644                                                          
          Application 08/031,430                                                      

               Our deliberations in this matter have included evaluation              
          and review of the following materials: (1) the instant                      
          specification and all of the claims on appeal; (2) appellant's              
          Brief and Reply Brief; (3) the examiner's Answer; and (4) the               
          prior art references cited and relied on by the examiner.                   
               Having carefully considered these materials, we find                   
          ourselves in agreement with the position succinctly set forth by            
          appellant in the "argument" sections of the Brief and Reply                 
          Brief.  We only add that none of the prior art references relied            
          on by the examiner would have suggested employing a material that           
          acts simultaneously as an absorbing medium, an adsorbing medium             
          and a catalyst carrier, such as an activated carbon, together               
          with water and a catalyst in an ethylene oxide conversion                   
          process.  Nor would these references have suggested rinsing the             
          material with water in the presence of a catalyst for the purpose           
          of converting the ethylene oxide into ethylene glycol.                      


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007