Appeal No. 2004-0495 Paper 22
Application No. 09/503,599 Page 9
terephthalate feed stream may be any reasonable temperature above its
melting point, e.g., 145 to 175o C., but here too for the reasons given
above, it is usually desirable to have its temperature approximate the
temperature on its feed plate. [c. 3, ll. 66-75.]
U.S. Patent 3,167,531 issued to Parker et al. and of record (IDS, Paper 4), states that
[f]irst, the reactants are prepared for the continuous operation of the
process. Dimethyl terephthalate or other suitable lower dialkyl ester of
terephthalic acid is heated to the liquid phase. ... Ethylene glycol is
supplied from a source and is fed to the ester-interchange zone separately
from the molten dimethyl terephthalate being fed to such zone. On the
way to the zone the glycol normally will be preheated, preferably to the
temperature of 140 to 180o C. While it is preferred to preheat the glycol so
that the ester-interchange reaction proceeds in an advantageous manner,
it is not essential to do so. [c. 2, ll. 16-32.]
Therefore, upon return of this application, the examiner should consider whether one or
more of claims 1-33 are unpatentable over Kurian (5,840,957) in view of Armstrong
(3,534,082) (including the newly pointed out disclosure at c. 4, ll. 66-69) and either
Vodonik (2,829,153) or Parker (3,167,531). The examiner is reminded to set forth
sufficient reasoning for asserting the obviousness or inherent nature of each claimed
limitation, i.e., each claim must be individually examined, in order to shift the burden to
appellants to come forward with evidence and/or arguments to rebut the examiner's
position.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007