Ex Parte Ohta et al - Page 2



                  Appeal 2007-2485                                                                                         
                  Application 10/142,750                                                                                   

                         Appellants’ invention relates to a fuel additive containing an alkylene-                          
                  oxide-adducted hydrocarbyl amide.  According to Appellants, the alkylene-                                
                  oxide-adducted hydrocarbyl amide is useful in a method for improving the                                 
                  acceleration response and the driving performance of internal combustion                                 
                  engines when used as fuel additives in hydrocarbon-based fuels, such as                                  
                  gasoline fuel (Specification 3-4).  Representative independent claim 25, as                              
                  presented in the Brief, appears below:                                                                   

                         25.  A method of improving the acceleration performance of gasoline                               
                  automobile engines comprising additizing a fuel additive comprising an                                   
                  alkylene-oxide adducted hydrocarbyl amide having from 3 to 50 moles of                                   
                  alkylene oxide per mole of hydrocarbyl amide to a gasoline and operating                                 
                  said engine with said gasoline.                                                                          
                         The Examiner relies on the following reference in rejecting the                                   
                  appealed subject matter:                                                                                 
                  Lin   WO 98/16599  Apr. 23, 1998                                                                         

                         Claims 25-34 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated                               
                  by Lin.1                                                                                                 
                         Anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102 requires that a prior art reference                            
                  describe each and every limitation of a claimed invention with “sufficient                               

                                                                                                                          
                  1 In rendering this decision, we have considered Appellants’ position                                    
                  presented in the Brief filed August 8, 2006.  Appellants have asserted that                              
                  the claims will stand or fall together.  We select claim 25 as representative of                         
                  the rejected claims and will limit our discussion thereto.                                               
                                                            2                                                              



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013