Appeal No. 1997-1593
Application No. 08/469,685
the application, which are claims 21 through 23, stand
withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner.
The subject matter on appeal relates to a method and
apparatus for reacting a feed gas to produce a product and
separating the product from unreacted feed gas. Claims 1 and
13 are adequately representative of this appealed subject
matter, and a copy of these claims taken from the appellants’
brief is appended to this decision.
The following reference is relied upon by the examiner in
the rejections before us:
Tonkovich, “The Simulated Countercurrent Chromatographic
Reactor and Separator, A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of
the Graduate School of the University of Minnesota,” pp. 1-210
(1992).
All of the claims on appeal stand rejected under 35
U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as being anticipated by the Tonkovich thesis.
These appealed claims also stand rejected under the
judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double
patenting as being unpatentable over the claims of copending
related application Serial No. 08/469,801.
OPINION
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007