Appeal No. 2007-0111
Reexamination 90/006,297
1 67. The Board in Ex parte Natta, Appeal No. 95-2683 did not distinguish
2 Ex parte Natta, Appeal No. 89-1569, slip op. at 2-6 (BPAI 1990).
3 68. The examiners of the original patent were bound by Ex parte Natta,
4 Appeal No. 89-1569 (BPAI 1990).
5 69. The reexamination examiner has not rejected the appealed claims as
6 failing to comply with the written description requirement of 35
7 U.S.C. § 112, ¶1, because such a rejection is barred and, in any event,
8 the subject matter of the appealed claims was part of the disclosure of
9 the ‘912 application, as originally filed on May 12, 1992.
10
11 Effective Filing Date of the Claimed Subject Matter
12 70. The specifications of the Italian priority applications, the ‘097
13 application, and the ‘840 application as originally filed differ
14 significantly from the specification of the ‘687 patent under
15 reexamination.
16 71. Italian priority application 24227 relates to the polymerization of
17 propylene to form highly crystalline propylene polymers. (See
18 Certified English translation of 24227 filed on May 22, 1959 in
19 03/514,097, page 2.)
24
Page: Previous 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013