Ex parte MCGUCKIN et al. - Page 3




          Appeal No. 1997-0486                                                        
          Application 08/417,290                                                      


          wherein                                                                     
               R , R , R  and R  are independently an alkylene group of 13  4  5       6                                                       
          to 8 carbon atoms,                                                          
               W is a covalent bond or methylene, ethylene or a                       
          cycloalkylene having 5 to 7 carbon atoms in the ring, provided              
          that when W is cycloalkylene, the two nitrogen atoms are                    
          attached to the ring at adjacent carbon atoms, and                          
               M , M , M  and M  are independently hydrogen or a1  2  3       4                                                       
          monovalent cation.                                                          
                                   THE REFERENCES                                     
          Yamada et al. (Yamada)             4,839,273       Jun. 13,                 
          1989                                                                        
          Cullinan et al. (Cullinan)         4,921,779       May   1,                 
          1990                                                                        
          Fujita et al. (Fujita)             5,334,493       Aug.  2,                 
          1994                                                                        
                                   THE REJECTIONS                                     
               The claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as                     
          follows: claims 1-5, 7, 8, 10-15 and 17-22 over Cullinan in                 
          view of Yamada, and claim 9 over Cullinan in view of Yamada                 
          and Fujita.                                                                 
                                       OPINION                                        
               We have carefully considered all of the arguments                      
          advanced by appellants and the examiner and agree with                      
          appellants that the aforementioned rejections are not well                  


                                          3                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007