Appeal No. 1999-2506 Application No. 08/545,254 USPQ 805, 808 (CCPA 1979) ("The evidence presented to rebut a prima facie case of obviousness must be commensurate in scope with the claims to which it pertains.") The appellants further argue that Palackal is directed to the stereospecific polymerization of propylene, a limited area of olefin polymerization. However, the scope of the claimed subject matter includes both the polymerization of propylene and stereospecific polymerizations. The appellants further argue that the polymer produced according to the present invention has a substantially higher molecular weight than that produced by Hasegawa, Brief, page 6 and that of Palackal. See Brief, page 7. The polymers of Palackal however are directed to stereospecific polypropylene. Although these polymers fall within the scope of the claimed subject matter, one cannot directly compare the molecular weight obtained from the polymerization of a propylene monomer with that obtained from the polymerization of an ethylene monomer. Indeed, the single example within the scope of Hasegawa, Example 4, directed to the polymerization of ethylene and utilizing a bridged moiety between a fluorenyl moiety and a cyclopentadienyl moiety results in a polyethylene having a molecular weight exceeding that obtained and disclosed by the appellants in Table 1 of the specification. Accordingly, it is reasonable to conclude that metallocene catalysts having bridged fluorenyl and cyclopentadienyl moieties could be used to produce polyethylene polymers having higher molecular weight than the corresponding polypropylene polymers. 9Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007