Ex parte VON TAPAVICZA et al. - Page 2




          Appeal No. 1997-2263                                                        
          Application No. 08/266,388                                                  


                                     THE INVENTION                                    
               Appellants claim a process for inhibiting the formation of             
          solid hydrocarbon incrustations from hydrocarbon mixtures by                
          adding to the hydrocarbon mixtures a recited inhibitor mixture.             
          Claim 12 is illustrative and reads as follows:                              
               12.  The process of inhibiting the formation of solid                  
          hydrocarbon incrustations from hydrocarbon mixtures which are               
          fluid and prone to form such incrustations, comprising                      
          contacting said hydrocarbon mixtures with an inhibitor mixture              
          comprising                                                                  
          (a) esters of phosphoric acid or salts thereof and alkoxylated              
          aliphatic, cycloaliphatic or aromatic alcohols, and                         
          (b) fatty acid oligo-dialkanolamides.                                       

                                    THE REFERENCES                                    
          Walton                           4,813,482         Mar. 21, 1989            
          Sugier et al. (Sugier)           4,973,775         Nov. 27, 1990            
                                     THE REJECTION                                    
               Claims 12-32 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being             
          unpatentable over Walton in view of Sugier.                                 
                                        OPINION                                       
               We have carefully considered all of the arguments advanced             
          by appellants and the examiner and agree with appellants that               
          the aforementioned rejection is not well founded.  Accordingly,             
          we reverse this rejection.                                                  

                                          2                                           





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007