Appeal 2007-1224
Application 10/628,725
making a finding that hydrogenated 1,4-linked dienes within the diene block
are encompassed by the claims, we cannot agree. The claim specifically
requires that the fraction of 1,2-linked diene within the diene block be
selectively hydrogenated. In order for the term “selectively” to have
meaning, something else must not be selected. In the present context
(Specification 7:13-13 and 8:1-11), the 1,2-links are selected for
hydrogenation while the 1,4-links are not (see also Br. 4).
With respect to the rejection of claim 17, the Examiner relies upon
Lühmann in the same capacity as discussed above and, therefore, the
rejection fails for the same reasons as discussed above.
IV. DECISION
With regard to decision of the Examiner to reject claims 1-16 as
unpatentable under either 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) or § 103(a) and the Examiner’s
decision to reject claim 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), we REVERSE.
REVERSED
cam
NORRIS, MCLAUGHLIN & MARCUS, P.A.
875 Third Avenue
18th Floor
New York, NY 10022
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6
Last modified: September 9, 2013