Appeal No. 1998-3264
Application No. 08/345,371
respect to this rejection. As a consequence, the examiner’s
section 112, second paragraph, rejection cannot be sustained.
As for the section 112, first paragraph, rejection, the
answer contains comments that are at least related to the
issue of nonenablement. These comments, however, amount to
nothing more than an allegation of nonenablement without any
reasons in support thereof. Because a rejection for lack of
enablement must be substantiated with reasons (In re
Armbruster, 512 F.2d 676, 677-78, 185 USPQ 152, 153 (CCPA
1975)), the examiner’s section 112, first paragraph, rejection
also cannot be sustained.
Finally, the examiner’s section 102 and section 103
rejections of the appealed claims as being unpatentable over
Georges cannot be sustained. This is because, as correctly
indicated by the appellants in their briefs, the applied
reference simply does not contain any teaching or suggestion
of forming a nitroxide stable free radical agent from a
precursor material in a reaction vessel as required in step
(a) in combination with introducing ingredients into said
reactor vessel in accordance with step (b) and heating the
ingredients in said reactor vessel in accordance with step (c)
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007