Appeal No. 2000-0782
Application No. 08/549,322
organic solvent consisting of at least one saturated halogen-
containing hydrocarbon.
The examiner has relied upon the following references as
evidence of obviousness:
Wairaevens et al. (Wairaevens) 5,008,474 Apr. 16, 1991
Rao WO 89/12614 Dec. 28, 1989
(published International Application)
Lovelace, Aliphatic Fluorine Compounds, pp. 12-14, 1958.
Claims 1-29 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Wairaevens in view of Rao and Lovelace (Answer,
page 3).2 We affirm the examiner’s rejection but denominate this
“affirmance” as a new ground of rejection pursuant to the
provisions of 37 CFR § 1.196(b) since we rely upon a claim
construction, admitted prior art, and reasoning that differs from
the examiner’s principal analysis of the claims and the applied
prior art. Our reasoning follows.
2The examiner inadvertently omits the actual restatement of
the rejection on page 3 of the Answer. However, this rejection
is appropriately stated on page 2 of the final Office action
dated Aug. 29, 1997, Paper No. 22, and is stated and argued by
appellants as the issue on pages 3-4 of the Brief. Accordingly,
the examiner’s omission is deemed harmless and we review the
rejection as stated in the final Office action.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007