Appeal No. 2001-1932
Application No. 08/829,512
palladium complex of 1,4-bis(diphenylphosphino)butane . . . [t]he
substituent on the Suto chloropyridine ring may be an oxy-carbon
group.” Id., page 5. The examiner relies on CA ‘621 as
disclosing that phenoxy substituted pyridine or pyridine amides
are known herbicides. Id.
The examiner maintains that it would have been obvious to
one of ordinary skill in the art to have made phenoxy substituted
heterocyclic herbicides as taught by CA ‘621 using the processes
disclosed in Takeuchi or Suto. Id. Appellants argue, inter
alia, that “Takeuchi et al. (and Suto et al.) does not teach or
suggest the use of heterocyclic compounds having a -OR ring
substituent.” Appeal Brief, page 16.
As discussed in connection with the previous ground of
rejection, the examiner’s rejection is completely devoid of
“particular findings” as to why one of ordinary skill in the art,
with no knowledge of the claimed invention, would have used the
teachings of Suto and Takeuchi to produce the compounds disclosed
in CA ‘621. Further, as pointed out by appellants, CA ‘621
references a different process for preparation of the disclosed
compounds. See Appeal Brief, page 17. The examiner has failed
to identify any teaching or suggestion in the prior art which
would have motivated one of ordinary skill in the art to have
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007