Ex parte ENGST - Page 3




          Appeal No. 1997-1122                                       Page 3           
          Application No. 08/170,177                                                  

               binding means for joining said granulate or shavings in a              
          form-maintaining rigid bond with each other and to define a                 
          multiplicity of hollow spaces in said body communicating with               
          each other and said top surface thereby facilitating the                    
          dispersal of said hydrocarbons within said body for absorption              
          thereby;                                                                    
               said binding means being resistant to hydrocarbons                     
          thereby causing said body to retain its overall shape in the                
          presence of said hydrocarbons; and                                          
               said flat molded body having additional space formed                   
          therein to accommodate swelling of said flat molded body as                 
          the hydrocarbons become trapped therein.                                    
               The prior art references of record relied upon by the                  
          examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:                              
          Crouch et al. (Crouch)        3,591,494                July 06,             
          1971                                                                        
          Stark                         4,481,335                Nov. 06,             
          1984                                                                        
          Valley                        4,826,030                May 02,              
          1989                                                                        
          Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology (Kirk-Othmer),              
          Third Edition, Vol. 16, pp. 433-34 and Vol. 20, pp. 367-69,                 
          432 and 433, John Wiley and Sons (1981).                                    
               Claims 14, 15, 17, 20, 22, 23, 25, 26, 28-32, and 34                   
          stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable                  
          over Valley in view of Crouch and Stark.  Claims 24 and 27                  
          stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable                  
          over Valley in view of Crouch and Stark as applied above, and               
          further in view of Kirk-Othmer.                                             








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

Last modified: November 3, 2007