Ex parte MOHR et al. - Page 2




          Appeal No. 1998-2040                                       Page 2           
          Application No. 08/420,077                                                  


          metal hydroxide additive avoids nitrosamine formation in the                
          used antifreeze.  Claim 1, the sole independent claim on                    
          appeal, is reproduced below.                                                
                         A process for recovering a glycol from a                     
                    used glycol-containing technical fluid, which                     
                    comprises adding to the used glycol-containing                    
                    technical fluid an alkali metal hydroxide and an                  
                    organic solvent which forms, with the glycol, an                  
                    azeotropic mixture which has a lower boiling                      
                    point than the glycol itself and distilling off                   
                    this azeotropic mixture, wherein the used                         
                    glycol-containing technical fluid is used                         
                    antifreeze.                                                       

               The prior art references of record relied upon by the                  
          examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:                              
          Cox et al. (Cox)              3,878,055                Apr. 15,             
          1975                                                                        
          Chueh                         4,057,471                Nov. 08,             
          1977                                                                        
               Claims 1 and 3-6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as               
          being unpatentable over Chueh in view of Cox.                               
                                       OPINION                                        
               We refer to the appellants' brief and reply brief and to               
          the examiner’s answer for the opposing viewpoints expressed by              
          appellants and the examiner concerning the above noted                      
          rejection.  For the reasons of record, as particularly set                  








Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007