Appeal No. 1995-4851
Application 08/167,656
The examiner does not explain, and it is not apparent,
why one of ordinary skill in the art, in light of the above-
discussed teaching by Groppelli, would have had a “reasonable
expectation of obtaining a similar result” (answer, page 6) as
that obtained
when the Manzer catalyst is used. Instead, it appears that
Groppelli would have led one of ordinary skill in the art to
expect that Groppelli’s catalyst, if used in the Manzer
process, would produce symmetrical products rather than the
asymmetric compounds desired by Manzer.
The examiner argues that Manzer’s teaching, discussed
above, wherein reaction variables can be controlled to
minimize production of the trifluorochloroethane desired by
appellants, would have suggested using closely related
catalysts such as that disclosed by Groppelli (answer, page
6). This argument is not convincing. The examiner does not
explain why, in view Groppelli’s indication that use of zinc
in the catalyst causes the product to be symmetric rather than
to be asymmetric as desired by Manzer, one of ordinary skill
11
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007