Appeal No. 1999-2548
Application No. 08/648,236
Indeed, we agree with the appellants’ view that the
teachings of Cimbalo militate against rather than for the
examiner’s obviousness conclusion. This is because Cimbalo
teaches that contaminating metals lose their effectiveness
more slowly on zeolitic catalysts of the type taught by
Suggitt than on amorphous silica-alumina catalysts of the type
taught by Corneil (see the first full paragraph in the third
column on page 122 of Cimbalo). This teaching would have
suggested that Corneil’s process for reducing contaminating
metals on amorphous silica-alumina catalysts might not be
effective for reducing contaminating metals on zeolitic
catalysts of the type taught by Suggitt. Further, this
suggestion of ineffectiveness would have been reinforced by
Suggitt’s teaching that contaminating metals on his zeolitic
catalysts must be removed by a chlorination step even when
previously subjected to a reducing atmosphere of the type used
by Corneil (see lines 9 through 27 in column 3 of Suggitt
which disclose a pre-chlorination treatment with hydrogen
and/or carbon monoxide atmosphere and compare lines 9 through
46 in column 4 of Corneil which disclose treatment with a
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007