Appeal No. 1998-2012
Application 08/657,556
conducted in the liquid phase rather than the gas phase. See
Answer, p. 3. The examiner relies on Grant to establish that
producing uranyl fluoride hydrate by contacting uranium
hexafluoride with a liquid-phase mixture of water and hydrogen
fluoride is known. See Answer, p. 4. The examiner concludes
that (Answer, p. 4):
It would have been obvious at the time the invention
was made to modify the procedure of Mestepey by
running the first reaction in the liquid phase, as
taught by Grant et al. to realize the advantages of
using lower temperatures and pressures.
Appellants not only disagree that the combined teachings
of Mestepey and Grant would have suggested substituting the
liquid phase reaction disclosed in Grant for the gas phase
reaction disclosed in Mestepey, but additionally argue that
the references, either alone or in combination, fail to
suggest steps (c) through (e) of the claimed invention. See
Brief, p. 8; Reply brief, p. 2.
Manifestly, the examiner's statement of the rejection
fails to discuss how the references, either alone or in
combination, suggest "boiling said liquid solution comprised
of hydrogen fluoride and water from said first reactor to form
a vapor" as recited in step (c). Therefore, even assuming
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007