Appeal No. 96-3426
Application No. 08/115,274
filing date of Lahoda, i.e., Jan. 31, 1991. On Jan. 1991
tetraethyl lead was not normally used in the U.S. as an
antiknock/octane booster in gasoline since such usage was
regulated out of existence.” See Brief, page 5. We agree.
We add only that even when tetraethyl lead was widely used,
gasoline was available free of tetraethyl lead.
In addition, the references before us neither disclose
nor suggest the removal of tetraethyl lead or bromobutane.
Lahoda removes gasoline, diesel oil and lead in Example 2.
However, there is no teaching or suggestion that tetraethyl
lead or bromobutane is present, and even if present would be
removed by Lahoda’s process. Moreover, the secondary
references to Guymon and Hosmer are specifically directed to
the removal of hydrocarbons, the first in the absence of
emulsion formation and the second in the presence of emulsion
formation. Neither tetraethyl lead nor bromobutane are
hydrocarbons. We find no reason to conclude that the removal
of hydrocarbons will result in the simultaneous removal of
tetraethyl lead or bromobutane. Based upon the above
consideration, we conclude that the examiner has met his
burden of establishing a prima facie case of obviousness.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007