Ex Parte Costa et al - Page 1


                       The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written      
                              for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.               

                     UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                         
                                             __________                                                
                          BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                           
                                       AND INTERFERENCES                                               
                                             __________                                                
                                     Ex parte MARIO LUSI COSTA,                                        
                             CHUNMIN PU, and EDWARD J. BECHBERGER                                      
                                             __________                                                
                                        Appeal No.  2007-1227                                          
                                       Application No.  10/416,211                                     
                                             __________                                                
                                              ON BRIEF                                                 
                                             __________                                                
               Before ADAMS, LINCK and LEBOVITZ, Administrative Patent Judges.                         
               ADAMS, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                     

                                        DECISION ON APPEAL                                             
                     This is a decision on the appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the                   
               examiner’s final rejection of claims 1 and 3, which are all the claims pending in       
               the application.                                                                        
                     Claim 1 is illustrative of the subject matter on appeal and is reproduced         
               below:                                                                                  
                  1. A continuous process for the production of chlorine dioxide, which                
                     comprises:                                                                        
                           continuously reducing using hydrogen peroxide chlorate ions in an           
                     aqueous acid reaction medium which is maintained at its boiling point             
                     under a subatmospheric pressure while maintaining in the reaction                 
                     medium a residual chlorine concentration of about 0.1 to about 0.5 g/l            
                     while having no residual hydrogen peroxide concentration in said reaction         
                     medium.                                                                           






Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013