Appeal No. 95-4743
Application No. 08/066,773
The claims on appeal are directed to an organophilic clay
thickener (claim 1-9), a process for preparing the thickener
(claim 10), and a non-aqueous fluid system containing both the
thickener and a naturally occurring oil (claims 11-12).
Appellant acknowledges on page 3 of the Brief that all of
the claims stand or fall together for purposes of this appeal.
Accordingly, we will limit our consideration to claim 1 which
reads as follows:
1. An organophilic clay thickener for naturally occurring
oil systems selected from the group consisting of corn oil,
coconut oil, soybean oil, cottonseed oil, castor oil, linseed
oil, safflower oil, palm oil, peanut oil and tung oil
comprising the reaction product of:
(a) a smectite-type clay: and
(b) an organic cation derived from a naturally occurring
oil residue substantially similar to the naturally occurring
oil to be thickened in an amount of from about 75% to about
150% of the cation exchange capacity of the smectite-type
clay.
The examiner relies upon the following two prior art
references as evidence of obviousness:
Finlayson et al (Finlayson) 4,412,018 Oct. 25, 1983
Magauran et al (Magauran) 4,664,820 May 12, 1987
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007