Appeal No. 1997-3614
Application No. 08/433,272
Claims 1 through 28 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as unpatentable over the combined disclosures of Gause and
McFadden.
We reverse.
The examiner’s rejection is premised upon obviousness of
using the alumina substrate mentioned in McFadden as a support
for ferric chloride used in Gause’s vinyl chloride
purification process. See Answer, pages 3 and 4. However,
the fatal flaw in the examiner’s rejection is that there is no
suggestion to use alumina as an inert support for a
dehydrating agent. As correctly pointed out by appellants,
Gause discloses using ferric chloride as a dehydrating agent
in its vinyl chloride purification process. See column 2,
lines 56-61. Although McFadden mentions alumina, it states
that alumina is known to be used as an inert support for a
catalyst. See column 1, lines 19-25. On this record, the
examiner simply fails to proffer any evidence that one of
ordinary skill in the art would have been led to use alumina
as a support for a dehydrating agent. Accordingly, we are
constrained to reverse the examiner’s decision rejecting
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007