Appeal No. 2000-0782
Application No. 08/549,322
OPINION
A. Claim Construction
Prior to any analysis of the scope of the prior art and
comparison with the claimed subject matter, we construe the scope
of the claimed subject matter as broadly as reasonably possible in
light of the specification as it would have been interpreted by one
of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048,
1054, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
The process recited in claim 1 on appeal requires the
production of 1-chloro-1-fluoro-ethane, 1,1-difluoroethane or
mixtures thereof, by reacting hydrogen fluoride and vinyl chloride
in the liquid phase, where the reactants are introduced into an
organic solvent consisting of at least one saturated halogen-
containing hydrocarbon. The saturated halogen-containing
hydrocarbon solvent may be a halogen-containing hydrocarbon which
is “external” to the reaction, “that is to say a compound other
than those which are formed from vinyl chloride.” Specification,
page 3, ll. 4-7. However, in an “advantageous embodiment, the
solvent may consist, partly or totally, of products formed in the
process.” Specification, page 6, ll. 21-25. Accordingly,
construing the process of claim 1 on appeal as broadly as
reasonably possible in light of the specification as it would be
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007