Appeal No. 96-0736
Application 07/984,596
distillation compound. The error in the examiner’s reasoning is
that although it can be said that the appealed claims are open to
the inclusion of Schnabel’s co-distillation compound, they also
define a process and composition which does not contain a co-
distillation compound and, yet, has a free diisocyanate content
of less than about 0.1% by weight. Manifestly, Schnabel provides
no teaching or suggestion of preparing polyisocyanates according
to the claimed method without utilizing a co-distillation
compound. Furthermore, Schnabel does not disclose or suggest
polyisocyanates having the claimed NCO content and average NCO
functionality, and the examiner has not advanced a line of
reasoning which establishes that the polyisocyanates of Schnabel
inherently possess the claimed NCO content and average NCO
functionality.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, the examiner’s
decision rejecting the appealed claims is reversed.
REVERSED
)
Edward C. Kimlin )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007