Appeal No. 2000-0132
Application No. 08/934,791
PRIOR ART
As evidence of obviousness, the examiner relies on the
following prior art references:
Determann et al. (Determann) 3,841,126 Oct. 15, 1974
Porath et al. (Porath) 3,960,720 Jun. 1, 1976
Schaeffer et al. (Schaeffer) 4,111,838 Sep. 5, 1978
Ayers et al. (Ayers) 4,330,440 May 18, 1982
Yuki et al. (Yuki) 4,375,495 Mar. 1, 1983
Hagel, Chromatographische Racemattrennung An Cellulosetriacetat,
pp. 134-35, (1976).2
Mikes’ Laboratory Handbook of Chromatographic and Allied Methods,
pp. 479-80 and 540-41 (John Wiley and Sons, NY, 1979)(hereinafter
referred to as “Mikes”).
THE REJECTIONS
The appealed claims stand rejected as follows:
1) Claims 21 through 25, 27, 31, 44 through 46, 48, 52, 54,
55 and 61 under 35 U.S.C. § 251 as “lacking reissuable
error”;
2) Claims 21 through 25, 27, 31, 44 through 46, 48, 52, 54,
55 and 61 under 35 U.S.C. § 251 as “not being drawn to the
same invention as the original patent”;
2 Our reference to this literature is to the corresponding
English translation of record.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007