Appeal No. 1998-3232 Page 6
Application No. 08/738,920
claim 19, the sole independent claim on appeal, with respect
to the required concentration of unreacted 1-olefin and amount
of polymer dissolved in the light phase when that claim is
read as a whole and in light of the accompanying
specification. Accordingly, we reverse the examiner’s
rejections of claims 2, 4-17, 19 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as unpatentable over the applied prior art on procedural
grounds and, pursuant to our authority under 37 CFR §4
1.196(b) (1997), enter the following new ground of rejection
under the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C.
§ 112.
Claims 2, 4-17, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to
particularly point out and distinctly claim the invention, for
the reasons explained below.
Our review of claims under appeal reveals that we are
unable to derive a proper understanding of the scope and
4We emphasize that this reversal is a technical reversal
rather than one based on the merits.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007