Appeal No. 1997-2010
Application No. 08/332,671
Brief and Reply Brief, we agree with appellants that the
examiner’s rejection is not sustainable for reasons which
follow.
Independent claim 1 on appeal recites, in Jepson-type form, a
process of reacting a diol with a dihydrocarbyl halophosphate
in the presence of a Lewis acid catalyst to form a hydrocarbyl
bis(dihydrocarbyl phosphate) product, wherein the improvement
comprises the presence of an effective amount of a liquid
hydrocarbon to enhance the removal of hydrogen halide by-
product, decrease the reaction temperature, and increase the
yield and purity of the product.
The examiner recognizes that Nichols is not directed to
the reaction recited in claim 1 on appeal but is directed to
“an analogous process that differs because it is not primarily
directed to producing products derived from diols, although
diols are listed among suitable alcohols in column 3, lines 61
and 62.” (Answer, page 4). The examiner concludes that it
would have been obvious to use the hydrocarbon solvent in view
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007