Appeal No. 96-0306
Application No. 07/709,369
White et al. 3,304,258 Feb. 14, 1967
(White)
Papay et al. 4,857,214 Aug. 15, 1989
(Papay)
Claims 1 through 8, 16 through 18, 22 through 25, 33 through
37 and 42 through 47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over White, and claims 9 through 15, 19 through 21,
38 through 41 and 48 are similarly rejected as being unpatentable
over White in view of Papay.
Claims 1 through 8, 16 through 18 and 22 through 25 are
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Jordan,
and claims 9 though 15, 19 through 21 and 48 are similarly
rejected as being unpatentable over Jordan in view of Papay.
We refer to the brief and to the answer for a complete
exposition of the opposing viewpoints expressed by the appellant
and the examiner concerning the above noted rejections.
OPINION
For the reasons set forth below, we cannot sustain any of
the rejections before us on this appeal.
The primary references to White and Jordan contain no
teaching or suggestion of compositions or the corresponding
methods relating to environments such as an automatic
transmission fluid or a fluid for a wet brake system as claimed
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007