Appeal No. 1997-1536
Application 08/342,817
therein disclosed process may be improved by the further
addition of sucrose, or any other material, to the urea
solution used for improving the properties of the char
prepared by Hayden's process. And while we disagree with
appellants' interpretation of Bearden's disclosure at column
2, line 64 through column 3, line 3 (Bearden does provide for
mixing the aqueous chromic acid and sucrose containing
solution with a charge of coal in a hydrocarbon diluent and
preparing the catalyst in situ), Bearden's catalyst, whatever
its nature, is not described as a carbonaceous char.
Additionally, while we agree appellants' claims do not exclude
chromium, Bearden's chromium-containing catalyst is used in
so-called "hydrocarbon conversion" processes which are
hydrogenation reactions not the oxidation reactions in which
appellants' catalysts are useful.
We are unable to find any factual basis in this record
which supports the examiner's position for further including
the sucrose of Bearden in the process of Hayden. Accordingly,
we shall reverse both the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 and
the rejection over the same prior art on the judicially
14
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007