Appeal No. 95-1622
Application 07/890,593
discloses that increasing the time of exposure will increase the extent to which the reaction occurs (col.
11, lines 30-33).
Declarant McCormick states that the qualitative results “[demonstrate] that the inclusion of
nucleophilic groups (as in Wright) interferes with or precludes bonding of photogenerated
‘CpMn(CO)2’ species with basic sites on the substrate, as in the present invention” (¶17; emphasis
ours). We must agree with declarant McCormick that based on the results with solutions 1-3, it is
apparent that the presence of the non-monomeric nucleophilic compound interferes with the bonding of
the non-monomeric organometallic complex to the basic reactive sites on the substrate at the stated
molar ratios of energy sensitive organometallic to reactive nucleophilic groups, but the extent of
interference appears to be a function of the period of exposure to the radiation, which is consistent with
the teachings of Wright as we noted above. However, we find no statement or evidence with respect to
declaration Example A which supports the conclusion that the presence of the non-monomeric
nucleophilic groups precludes the bonding of the non-monomeric organometallic compound with the
substrate even at the stated molar ratios of energy sensitive organometallic to reactive nucleophilic
groups for any of the exposure periods.
We find that declaration Example B (¶ 19) also does not provide a side-by-side comparison of
a claimed article with an article prepared according to “Wright Examples 10-12 (embodiment I), 13, 14
and 17 (embodiment II) , and 22 (embodiment III),” which Wright Embodiments we have discussed
above. While declaration Example B does employ a copolymer of vinyl(methyl)cyclopentandienyl
manganese tricarbonyl and styrene in methyl ethyl ketone as “solution 1” representing Wright (¶ 19), this
“solution” differs significantly from each of the exemplified Wright Embodiments because it contains “4-
t-butylpyridine” which as we explained above is a non-monomeric mononucleophilic compound. Thus,
“solution 1” is not representative of Wright Embodiments I through III because (1) in Wright
Embodiment I, the copolymer contains both nucleophilic groups and energy sensitive organometallic
groups; (2) in Wright Embodiment III, one of the two copolymers contains only nucleophilic groups
while the other copolymer contains only energy sensitive organometallic groups; and (3) in Wright
Example B to prepare a copolymer (¶ 19).
- 15 -
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007