Appeal No. 1998-1281
Application No. 08/472,376
We have carefully considered each of appellant's
arguments for patentability. However, we are not persuaded by
appellant that the examiner has committed reversible error in
finally
rejecting the appealed claims. Accordingly, we will sustain
the examiner's rejection for essentially those reasons
expressed in the answer, and we add the following primarily
for emphasis.
Appellant does not dispute the examiner's factual
determination that Lal, the present inventor, discloses a
composition comprising a major amount of the claimed
triglyceride oil, a pour point depressant that is of the same
nature as the claimed component, and a viscosity improver. In
addition, appellant does not dispute the examiner's finding
that Jokinen establishes that the index improvers disclosed by
Lal and hydrogenated aliphatic conjugated diene/mono-vinyl
aromatic random block copolymers, are art recognized
equivalents, or that Small evidences the conventionality of
utilizing hydrogenated random block copolymers of styrene and
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007