Appeal No. 95-3682
Application No. 08/028,916
DISCUSSION
On consideration of the record, we reverse the examiner's
prior art rejection of claims 1 through 10 and 46. Respecting
claims 48 through 57, which improperly depend from canceled
claims, we remand this application so that the examiner may
take further, appropriate action.
Independent claim 1 requires that applicants' polymeric
flocculant have
a solubility quotient of greater than about
30 percent and a branching agent content of from
about 4 to about 80 molar parts per million based on
initial monomer content, said flocculant being
efficient when added as a true solution to
dispersions of suspended solids for the purpose of
releasing water therefrom.
In our judgment, Flesher constitutes insufficient evidence to
support a finding of anticipation or a conclusion of
obviousness of claims containing those limitations.
First, applicants make clear that adding a chain-transfer
agent, in optimum concentration, is essential to the practice
of their invention. According to applicants, adding an
through 57 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as anticipated by or, in the
alternative, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
Japanese Patent 238,780. Apparently, that rejection has been
withdrawn because it is not repeated or referred to in the
Examiner's Answer.
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007