Appeal No. 2003-0897 Page 6
Application No. 09/640,796
process recited in appealed claims 1 through 5 and 20.
Additionally, applicants describe the initial step of converting a dialdehyde having
formula (2) into its corresponding acetal-protected aldehyde having formula (3)
(specification, page 3, lines 3 through 18). According to applicants,
It has been discovered that, in spite of the fact that the selectivity in
the first step of the process can be relatively low, an economically
attractive process can nevertheless be obtained. [Specification, page 4,
lines 12-14]
This means to say that any person skilled in the art would have recognized a downside
in converting a dialdehyde having formula (2) into its corresponding acetal-protected
aldehyde having formula (3) viz., relatively low selectivity. If that initial step is used,
however, "an economically attractive process can nevertheless be obtained."
But it is not necessary or critical to the overall success of applicants' multi-step
process that the initial step begin with a dialdehyde having formula (2). On the
contrary, any person skilled in the art would have recognized that applicants' multi-step
process could begin with an acetal-protected aldehyde having formula (3), thereby
skirting the use of dialdehyde (2) entirely. As pointed out by applicants, and not
disputed by the examiner, an acetal-protected aldehyde representative of compounds
having formula (3) "was known and available at the time the invention was made."
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007