Appeal No. 1997-0433
Application 08/230,582
(meth)acrylate monomer, from about 5 weight percent to about 85 weight percent of the second
(meth)acrylate monomer and from about 5 weight percent to about 50 weight percent of the styrenic
monomer, to provide a solution of from about 30 weight percent to about 90 weight percent of a
viscosity index improving copolymer in the diluent, said solution including less than or equal to 1000
parts by weight residual styrene monomer per one million parts by weight solution.
8. A viscosity index improving copolymer solution made by the method of claim 1.
The appealed claims as represented by claims 1 and 82 are drawn to a method for making a
viscosity index improving copolymer solution comprising at least (1) polymerizing a monomer mixture in
an oil soluble diluent and in the presence of a polymerization initiator to form a polymerization
intermediate, wherein the monomer mixture comprises at least a first (meth)acrylate monomer with an
alcohol moiety independently selected from (C16-C24)alkyl, a second (meth)acrylate monomer with an
alcohol moiety independently selected from (C7-C15)alkyl and a styrenic monomer in the amounts
specified; and (2) polymerizing, in the presence of the polymerization intermediate, additional
(meth)acrylate monomer consisting essentially of the first or second (meth)acrylate monomer or a
mixture thereof, in the amounts indicated. The viscosity index improving copolymer solution so
prepared is specified in claim 1 to contain about 30 weight percent to about 90 weight percent of the
copolymer in the diluent, and to include less than or equal to 1000 parts by weight residual styrene
monomer per one million parts by weight solution. The viscosity index improving copolymer solution
characterized by the method specified in claim 1 is encompassed by claim 8. According to appellant,
“current environmental and health concerns dictate that the amount of residual styrenic monomer present
in any commercial embodiment of the copolymer be reduced to a level below 1000 parts per million”
(specification, page 1).
The references relied on by the examiner are:
Jarvis et al. (Jarvis) 4,933,400 Jun. 12, 1990
Suzuki et al. (Suzuki)3 59-20715 May 15, 1984
2 Appellant, in the brief (page 3), has grouped process claims 1 and 4 through 7 and product claims 8
through 10, which groups of claims have been separately rejected by the examiner. Thus, we select
claims 1 and 8 on which to decide this appeal. 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7) (1995).
3 We refer in our opinion to the translation of Suzuki submitted by appellant in the information
disclosure statement of July 22, 1994 (Paper No. 7).
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007