Appeal No. 95-0996
Application 07/943,025
with the specification and claim language should be read in
light of the specification as it would be interpreted by one
of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Sneed, 710 F.2d 1544,
1548, 218 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1983). The specification
defines “deactivated” as “no longer active with regard to
polymerization.” (specification, page 8, lines 1-2).
Tachikawa I teaches that conventional Ziegler-Natta
catalysts have such a high activity that disadvantageous
results occur (page 1, lines 22-35). Tachikawa I further
discloses that advantageous results occur if this catalyst
system can be “temporarily inhibited” by contact with an
activity inhibitor (page 2, lines 1-13). The activity
inhibitor can be carbon monoxide or carbon dioxide and
“temporarily inactivates a part of all the active sites on the
polymerization catalyst.” (page 7, lines 17-24). The
“temporarily inactivated” catalyst can be immediately used in
the standard polymerization reactions (see Examples 1-4).
Accordingly, Tachikawa I fails to disclose or suggest the
complete deactivation of the catalyst system required by the
process of appealed claim 1.
The examiner argues that the quoted portion from page 7,
lines 23-24, of Tachikawa I should read “[t]he activity
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007