Appeal No. 1999-1833 4
Application No. 08/480,728
As an initial matter, appellants submit that, “[s]eparate arguments will be made for
Claims 18 and 20-33, for Claim 19 and for Claim 33.” See Brief, page 4. Accordingly,
separate consideration is given to each of the aforesaid claims. See 37 CFR
§ 1.192(c)(7) and (8)(1997).
The Rejection under § 103(a)
It is the position of the examiner that although, “Kioka discloses all the essential
limitations of claim 18, the generic claim, except for the addition of the claimed lithium
compounds.” See Answer, page 5. Each of the secondary references is thereafter relied
upon to suggest the addition of the lithium compounds to the catalyst of Kioka.
Significantly, the appellants’ argument is directed exclusively to the combination of either
of the lithium compounds in a process for the polymerization of olefins. See Brief,
page 4. The appellants state, “[n]either Kioka et al, Bohmer et al, Numao et al nor Raich
et al, individually or in combination, teach, disclose or suggest lithium cyclopentadienide
or lithium indene in a process for the polymerization of olefins.” Id.
Accordingly, we adopt the examiner’s findings and conclusion to the extent that Kioka
discloses each of the limitations of the claimed subject matter other than the addition of the
lithium compounds.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007