Ex Parte RAZAVI et al - Page 2



          Appeal No. 1998-3182                                                        
          Application No. 08/459,526                                                  
               Claim 1 is illustrative:                                               
               1.    A catalyst system effective in the preparation of                
               polyolefins having a multimodal or at least bimodal                    
               molecular weight distribution comprising a supported                   
               catalyst-component comprising an alumoxane and at least                
               two supported metallocenes each having activity                        
               effective for olefin polymerization containing the same                
               transition metal and selected from the group consisting                
               of mono, di, and tri-cyclopentadienyls and substituted                 
               cyclopentadienyls of a Group 4b, 5b, or 6b transition                  
               metal wherein at least one of the metallocenes is                      
               bridged and at least one of the metallocenes is                        
               unbridged.                                                             
               In the rejection of the appealed claims the examiner relies            
          upon the following reference as evidence of obviousness:                    
               Tsutsui et al. (Tsutsui)      5,374,700      Dec. 20, 1994             
               Appellants’ claimed invention is directed to a catalyst                
          system comprising alumoxane and the recited bridged and unbridged           
          metallocenes on a support, such as silica.  The catalyst system             
          is effective in preparing polyolefins having at least a bimodal             
          molecular weight distribution.                                              
               Appealed claims 1-6, 15, 16, 18 and 20-24 stand rejected               
          under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as anticipated by, or in the                       
          alternative, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over               
          Tsutsui.                                                                    
               Appellants have not set forth separate arguments for                   
          claims 2-6 and 15.  Accordingly, claims 2-6 and 15 stand or                 

                                          2                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007