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.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007