Appeal No. 1997-0186
Application No. 08/314,568
Discussion
A. Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103
EP '524 discloses a catalyst component useful for
polymerizing olefins, especially alpha-olefins such as
propylene (p. 2, lines 2-6). According to EP '524, the
catalyst component exhibits outstanding catalytic performance,
such as high activity and high stereoregularity, and is
prepared by (EP '524, p. 2):
[C]ontacting (A) a metal oxide, (B) a dihydrocarbyl
magnesium, and (C) a hydrocarbyloxy group-containing
compound with one another, contacting the thus
obtained contact product with (D) a halogen-
containing alcohol, and finally contacting the thus
obtained contact product with (E) an electron donor
compound and (F) a titanium compound . . . .
The examiner's position is predicated on separate
theories. First, the examiner interprets claim 1 narrowly to
exclude the electron donor compound of EP '524.
Alternatively, the examiner interprets claim 1 broadly to
include the electron donor compound of EP '524. The examiner
argues that (Answer, p. 7):
Appellants' composition would have been obvious
. . . because it is well settled that deletion of a
component and its' concomitant function is not
unobvious. In re Hamilton, 160 U.S.P.Q. 199.
Furthermore, appellants' claims are not closed to
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007