Ex Parte Pace et al - Page 2

                Appeal 2007-1483                                                                             
                Application 10/344,390                                                                       
                      The Appellants’ invention is directed to a method for reducing wear in                 
                an internal combustion engine that runs on a low sulfur content gasoline fuel                
                by lubricating the engine with a low phosphorus content lubricating oil                      
                composition.                                                                                 
                      Claim 11, the only independent claim on appeal, reads as follows:                      
                      A method for reducing wear in an internal combustion engine                            
                      running on a gasoline fuel having a sulfur content of less than                        
                      10 ppm by weight said method comprising lubricating said                               
                      engine using a lubricating oil composition which has a                                 
                      phosphorus content of no more than 0.05 % by weight.                                   
                      The Examiner relies on the following evidence in rejecting the claims                  
                on appeal:                                                                                   
                Waddoups                 U.S. Patent 6,074,993           Jun. 13, 2000                       
                Lesieur                 U.S. Patent 6,129,835           Oct. 10, 2000                       
                Welstand                U.S. Patent 6,383,236 B1        May 7, 2002                         
                Colclough                EP 0 280 579 A2                 Aug. 31, 1988                       
                Colclough                EP 0 280 580 A2                 Aug. 31, 1988                       

                      B.    ISSUES                                                                           
                      Have the Appellants sustained their burden of showing that the                         
                Examiner erred in rejecting claims 11 and 13-29 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as                  
                being unpatentable over Waddoups in combination with Lesieur or                              
                Welstand?                                                                                    
                      Have the Appellants sustained their burden of showing that the                         
                Examiner erred in rejecting claims 11 and 13-29 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as                  
                being unpatentable over Colclough 579 or Colclough 580 in combination                        
                with Lesieur or Welstand?                                                                    


                                                     2                                                       

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013