Appeal No. 2002-2283
Application No. 08/882,513
record in Application 08/882,513 by amendment dated May 4, 2000
(Paper No. 19) prior to the final rejection. In an Office action
dated May 24, 2000 (Paper No. 21/22), the examiner stated that
Claims 1-10, 20-22, and 26-31 were pending and finally rejected the
claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hayase
et al., CA 111:153338 (abstract of JP 63227552)(“Hayase”), or Erra-
Balsells et al., CA 111:39159 (abstract of An. Assoc. Quim. Argent.
(1988), 76(4), 285-296). New Claim 32, entered May 4, 2000, was
not mentioned in the May 24, 2000, Office action. On October 27,
2000, applicants filed notice of appeal of the examiner’s final
rejection of Claims 1-10, 20-22, and 26-31 (Paper No. 24) and an
Amendment After Final Action Pursuant To 37 C.F.R. § 1.116 amending
Claim 32 (Paper No. 25). The examiner denied entry of applicants’
Claim 32, as amended after final (Paper No. 25), in the Office
communication dated November 9, 2000 (Paper No. 26), stating that:
The affidavit, exhibit or request for reconsideration
has been considered but does NOT place the application
in condition for allowance because: the declaration and
arguments are not found persuasive.
For purposes of Appeal, the status of the claims is
as follows: Claims rejected 1-10, 20-22, and 26-32.
Other: Rejection over Erra-Balsells et al. is
withdrawn because claims are amended. Rejection over
Hayase et al. is maintained because (1) the data in the
declaration is not considered a side by side comparison
(starting material amine is different) (2) Bis product
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007