Appeal No. 2002-0435 Page 2
Application No. 08/946,087
(a) providing a sorbitan ester solution containing polyol impurities;
(b) adding to the sorbitan ester solution from about 0.01 to about 10% actives,
based on the total weight of final crude ester product formed, of a silica component;
(c) mixing the sorbitan ester solution and silica component;
(d) adsorbing the polyol impurities from the sorbitan ester solution onto the silica
to form a mixture of polyol-containing silica and sorbitan ester; and
(e) removing the polyol-containing silica from the sorbitan ester solution.
5. The process of claim 1 wherein the silica is added to the sorbitan ester
solution at a temperature of from about 30°C to about 80°C, with agitation.
The prior art reference relied on by the examiner is:
Stockburger 4,297,290 Oct. 27, 1981
Claims 1 and 3 through 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Stockburger.
Our deliberations in this matter have included evaluation and review of the
following materials: (1) the instant specification, including all of the claims on appeal;
(2) applicants' Appeal Brief (Paper No. 20); (3) the Examiner's Answer (Paper No. 21);
and (4) the above-cited Stockburger Patent.
On consideration of the record, including the above-listed materials, we affirm
the examiner's rejection of claims 1, 3, 4, and 6 through 11 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
However, we reverse the rejection of claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
Discussion
Initially, we point out that claim 3 depends from canceled claim 2. On return of
this application to the examining corps, we recommend that applicants correct this
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007