Appeal No. 96-1971
Application 07/914,388
particles of an amorphous or poorly crystalline high molecular weight copolymer of ethylene.” See
column 1, lines 47 - 51. Moreover, the copolymer, “must be substantially insoluble in that polymer.”
See column 3, lines 5- 6. In contrast, the claimed process requires both solution of the impact modifier
in the polyester and crystallization of the impact modifier. We find that Jones fails to disclose dissolution
of the impact modifier in the polyester or the crystallization of the impact modifier. Finally, we find no
suggestion in Jones that the molded product obtained as a result of his process has the oxygen
permeability characteristics required by the claimed subject matter.
Carson has similar deficiencies. Patentee discloses a high impact composition containing a
polyester and a core/shell additive. The components are blended, “using conventional melt blend
techniques.” See column 3, line 62. Thereafter an amorphous sheet is formed by, “immediately
quenching the sheet to a temperature below about 75 C to fix the sheet in the amorphous state.” Seeo
column 4, lines 6-7. We find that Carson teaches neither dissolution of the impact modifier, nor
crystallization of either components as required by the claimed process. Furthermore, there is no
suggestion in Carson that the molded product obtained as a result of his process has the oxygen
permeability characteristics required by the claimed subject matter.
Finally, the examiner must show reasons that the skilled artisan confronted with the same
problems as the inventor and with no knowledge of the claimed invention, would select the elements
from the cited prior art references for combination in the manner claimed. We determine that there is
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007