Ex parte BERECK et al. - Page 2




                     The subject matter on appeal is directed to improved processes for preparing                        
              aqueous solutions of N-methylol derivatives of carboxamides, urethanes, ureas and                          
              aminotriazines and/or the N-methylol ethers of carboxamides, urethanes, ureas and                          
              aminotriazines.  There are three different aspects of appellant’s claimed invention, each                  
              having in common the utilization of a boron containing catalyst.  The first aspect, which is               
              the subject of claim 11, concerns a process for preparing aqueous solutions of N-methylol                  
              compound of a carboxamide, urethane, urea or aminotriazine comprising reacting said                        
              carboxamide, urethane, urea or aminotriazine with formaldehyde using a catalyst selected                   
              from the group consisting of boron trifluoride, a boron trifluoride addition compound,                     
              tetrafluoroboric acid, and a salt of tetrafluoroboric acid.  The second aspect, which is the               
              subject of claims 12 to 18, concerns a process for preparing aqueous solutions of N-                       
              methylol ether of a carboxamide, urethane, urea or aminotriazine comprising reacting the                   
              corresponding N-methylol compound with an alcohol in the presence of a catalyst selected                   
              from the group consisting of boron trifluoride, a boron trifluoride addition compound and                  
              tetrafluoroboric acid.  The third aspect, which is the subject of claim 19, concerns a                     
              process for preparing an aqueous solution of an N-methylol ether of a carboxamide,                         
              urethane, urea or aminotriazine comprising reacting said carboxamide, urethane, urea or                    
              aminotriazine with formaldehyde and an alcohol in an aqueous solution using a catalyst                     
              selected from the group consisting of boron trifluoride, a boron trifluoride addition                      
              compound, tetrafluoroboric acid and a salt of tetrafluoroboric acid.  The novelty of the three             
              aspects of appellants’ processes resides in the use of the aforementioned catalyst.                        
                     In the brief, appellants have argued the claims separately as grouped above. Claim                  
              11 is sufficiently representative of the claims on appeal and reads as follows:                            






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007