Ex parte LEE et al. - Page 2




               Appeal No. 95-2142                                                                                                  
               Application No. 07/996,423                                                                                          


               1.      Claims 21-41 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over the combination of                   
                     2            3               4                                                                                
               Yoon,  Magagnini  and Pielartzik;  and                                                                              
               2.      Claims 21 and 32 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 2, as indefinite.                                  
                       We vacate and remand the § 103 rejection and reverse the rejection under § 112.                             
               The rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103                                                                                 
                       In general terms, the claimed subject matter is a method of producing a poly (ester-amide) fiber            
               by preparing a specified poly (ester-amide) composition, heating the composition until it melts, and spinning       
               the melt to form fibers.  On this record, the composition and the fibers have not been asserted to lack             
               novelty and/or to have been obvious.  Indeed, the poly (ester-amide) composition and fibers are patented            
               in U.S. Patent 5,204,403, which issued from the parent of the application involved in this appeal.  On this         
               record the steps of the process, i.e., preparing a poly (ester-amide), heating to melt the composition and          
               spinning the melt to make fibers, is old.  The difference between the old and conventional process and the          
               claimed subject matter is the specific starting poly (ester-amide) composition and fibers made from that            
               composition.  None of the references is asserted to suggest the specific combination of ingredients making          
               up the poly (ester-amide) composition.                                                                              
                       Not surprisingly, the examiner’s rejection is based upon In re Durden, 763 F.2d 1406, 226 USPQ              
               359 (Fed. Cir. 1985).  The examiner’s position can be understood from the following excerpt from the                
               Examiner’s Answer:                                                                                                  
                              [A]pplicants[’] claims are not directed to a method of using the polymer, but are                    
                              directed to the method of making a fiber from [a] starting polymer [which] is novel                  
                              and unobvious which does appear to be analogous to In re Durden, i.e. a method                       


                       2      U.S. Patent No. 4,562,244 issued December 31, 1985.                                                  
                       3      U.S. Patent No. 4,833,229 issued May 23, 1989.                                                       
                       4      U.S. Patent No. 5,030,730 issued July 9, 1991 (filed September 5, 1989).                             
                                                                2                                                                  





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007