Ex parte DURAND et al. - Page 5


            Appeal No. 96-3486                                                        
            Application No. 08/291,565                                                


                 As seen in claims 1 and 27, a porous layer of at                     
            least four substances:  a refractory inorganic oxide, an                  
            iron oxide; a cerium oxide; and a catalytically active                    
            metal such as platinum, rhodium, or palladium, is                         
            deposited on a ceramic or metal substrate to produce a                    
            catalyst.  The refractory inorganic oxide, according to                   
            the supporting specification (sentence bridging pages 1                   
            and 2), serves as a carrier for the catalytically active                  
            phase on the substrate and is selected from a group                       
            limited to certain crystalline aluminas, zeolite, silica-                 
            magnesia, titanium or zirconium                                           
            oxides, or mixtures thereof.  The cerium and iron oxides                  
            (page 2, lines 5-19) act to stabilize the catalyst during                 
            operation.  To this extent, the claimed methods cover                     
            conventional subject matter.2  The inventive feature                      
            resides, more particularly, in the manner by which these                  
            substances are combined.                                                  
                 The supporting specification states that a “new                      
            technique has now been discovered for introducing such                    
            oxides, particularly iron and cerium oxides, into the                     

                                                                                      
            2  See claim 1 of Brunelle, cited in both the supporting                  
            specification (page 2, line 16) and the final rejection.                  
                                          5                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007