Appeal No. 2007-0111
Reexamination 90/006,297
1 112. These Declarations, while not described as such,
2 are in fact directed to the proposition of enablement as
3 was the previous Declaration of Dr. Giannini
4 (Declaration of May 19, 1987). While it might be
5 obvious from the specification and the priority document
6 (Italian 25109) to copolymerize ethylene with alpha-
7 olefins of 4 or more carbon atoms in the presence of a
8 coordination catalyst containing a component having a
9 titanium to chloride bond, the specification and priority
10 document do not describe this invention.
11
12 99. In an Office action approved by Supervisory Patent Examiner Schofer
13 and mailed on April 8, 1993 (paper 63, page 4), Examiner Smith again
14 emphasized: “The reference to ethylene [in the prior applications and
15 the priority documents]...is always that the alpha-olefin is mixed with
16 a small amount or 5% of ethylene. There is no suggestion in the
17 specification to increase the percentage of ethylene above 5%, much
18 less to the unlimited range of these claims.”
19 100. The testimonies of the patent owner’s experts are at odds with the
20 actual text of the as-filed disclosures in question (as well as the early
21 prosecution history).
22 101. Appealed claim 16, which depends from claim 9, demonstrates that
23 the term “monomeric olefin molecules” in claim 9 reads on ethylene.
24 102. No limitation as to amount of ethylene content is recited in appealed
25 claim 9.
33
Page: Previous 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013