Appeal No. 95-0262
Application 07/924,606
either teach or provide a reasonable expectation that cyclohexane
and tetralin are equivalent reducing solvents for the catalytic
reduction of o-chloronitrobenzene to produce 2, 2'-dichlorohydra-
zobenzene as claimed herein. Absent the disclosure of the
present invention, Wollensack’s teachings would not have
suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art the proposed
modification of the Herrmann method. This is because, in our
view, the reactions in question are too dissimilar.
We also observe, as emphasized by appellant, that Herrmann
requires organic solvents which are inert to the action of
hydrogen under the Herrmann reaction conditions. See Herrmann at
column 3, lines 5 through 40, particularly, lines 6 and 7. In
contrast, the organic solvent required for the presently claimed
process, tetralin, reacts with hydrogen. Indeed, because of the
presence of a reducing catalyst in the claimed reaction system,
part of the tetralin solvent is advantageously reduced by
hydrogen to produce a mixture of tetralin and decalin.
Generally, see the specification at pages 10 and 11.
For the reasons stated above, we agree with appellant that a
prima facie case of obviousness has not been established for the
subject matter defined by the claims on appeal. This being the
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007