Appeal No. 95-2227
Application No. 08/048,964
(Fed. Cir. 1992). On these circumstances, we are constrained to reach the conclusion that
the examiner has failed to establish that it would have been obvious to those of ordinary skill
in the art at the time of the invention to periodically measure the C7 to C10 n-olefin and C7 to
C10 cyclic olefin content (Clm.18) or to periodically measure at least one of the butadiene
and methane yields (Clm. 19), in a catalytic cracking process, with the purpose of controlling
the amount of zeolite catalyst present in the reaction mixture. The examiner's rejections of the
claims are fatally defective since they do not properly account for and establish the
obviousness of the subject matter as a whole. Where the examiner fails to establish a prima
facie case, the rejection is improper and will be overturned. In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 1074,
5 USPQ2d 1596, 1598 (Fed. Cir.1988).
The rejections of claims 18-20 is reversed.
SUMMARY:
The rejections of claims 1-17 as being unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are
affirmed. The rejections of claims 18-20 as being unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are
reversed.
We affirm-in-part.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007