Appeal No. 1997-1959
Application 08/351,908
The appealed claims as represented by claim 11 are drawn to a process for preparing 2,2-
dihydro-hexafluoropropane (CF3CH2CF3, HFC-236fa) and 2-chloro-2-hydrohexafluoropropane
(CF3CHClCF3, HCFC-226da) by the hydrodechlorination of 2,2-dichlorohexafluoropropane
(CF3CCl2CF3, CFC-216aa), which comprises at least the step of reacting 2,2-
dichlorohexafluoropropane with hydrogen at the stated temperature in the presence of palladium
supported on fluorinated alumina, aluminum fluoride and mixtures thereof. The product obtained by the
claimed process can contain at least 90% of the fluorine atoms contained in 2,2-
dichlorohexafluoropropane and less than 5 mole percent of said product contains 5 fluorine substituents
(claim 8).
The references relied on by the examiner are:
Smith et al. (Smith) 2,942,036 June 21, 1960
Kellner et al. (Kellner I) 4,873,381 Oct. 10, 1989
Kellner et al. (Kellner II) 4,980,324 Dec. 25, 1990
The examiner has rejected appealed claims 1 through 10, 13 and 15 through 17 under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Kellner I in view of Smith and appealed claims 11, 12 and 14
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Kellner I in view of Smith for the reasons given in
the rejection of claims 1 through 10, 13 and 15 through 17 and further in view of Kellner II. We affirm
these grounds of rejection and thus the decision of the examiner.
Rather than reiterate the respective positions advanced by the examiner and appellant, we refer
to the examiner’s answer and to appellant’s brief for a complete exposition thereof.
Opinion
We have carefully reviewed the record on this appeal and based thereon find ourselves in
agreement with the examiner that the claimed process for preparing 2,2-dihydro-hexafluoropropane
(CF3CH2CF3) and 2-chloro-2-hydrohexafluoropropane (CF3CHClCF3) by the hydrodechlorination of
2,2-dichlorohexafluoropropane (CF3CCl2CF3) comprising at least reacting 2,2-
1 Appellant has grouped the appealed claims into 2 groups (brief, page 3) and the examiner has so
considered the appealed claims (answer, pages 2 and 7-8). Thus, we decide this appeal based on
appealed claims 1 and 8, which are representative of the respective groups. 37 CFR §
1.192(c)(7) (1995).
- 2 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007