Appeal No. 1996-3214 Page 5
Application No. 08/195,897
Claims 14-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Gorshkov in view of Mendicino.
Pursuant to the provisions of 37 CFR § 1.196(b), we make
the following new rejection: Claims 14-20 are rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph as failing to particularly
point out and distinctly claim that which applicants regard as
invention.
OPINION
We have carefully reviewed the respective positions
advanced by appellants and the examiner. In so doing, we
concur with appellants that the applied prior art fails to
establish a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed
subject matter. Accordingly, we will not sustain the
examiner's rejection.
All of the appealed method claims require the in situ
production of a haloplatinate hydrosilation catalyst via the
reaction of a quaternary ammonium, phosphonium, or arsonium
salt of a formula as specified in claim 14 with a haloplatinate
material. The claimed process requires that the above noted
reaction occurs in the presence (in situ) of the reaction
mixture the resultant catalyst product material catalyzes;
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007