Appeal No. 2004-1092 Page 2
Application No. 10/014,425
According to appellants, the claimed mixed oxide
compositions exhibit improved UV light absorption as compared
with products of the prior art (specification, page 2, lines 17-
21). Exemplary claim 2 is reproduced below.
2. A titanium dioxide powder composition consisting of a flame
hydrolytically prepared iron oxide/titanium dioxide mixed oxide
with a BET surface area of 10 to 150 m2/g and a particle size
ranging between 5 nm-100 nm, which contains 0.5 to 50 wt.% of
iron oxide, with reference to the total amount, as a component of
the mixed oxide.
The sole prior art reference of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims is:
Jin et al. (Jin), “Decomposition of 2-Butanol Catalyzed by Iron
Oxide and Mixed Oxides Containing Iron,” Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn;
Vol. 56, No. 11, 1983, pp. 3208-15.
Claims 2, 5 and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Jin.
We refer to the brief and to the answer for a complete
exposition of the opposing viewpoints expressed by appellants and
the examiner concerning the issues before us on this appeal.
OPINION
Having carefully considered each of appellants* arguments
set forth in the brief and reply brief, appellants have not
persuaded us of reversible error on the part of the examiner.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007