Appeal No. 1998-2834
Application 08/659,858
separately argued apart from base claim 18, the standing § 103
rejection thereof as being unpatentable over Kao KK in view of
Kenney also is sustained.
Claims 22 and 26
Claim 22 depends from claim 18 and states that the
adhesive has a primary transition frequency peak greater than
about 1000 radians per second. Claim 26 depends from claim 22
and adds that the adhesive has a secondary peak between a
frequency range of about 0.1 and about 1000 radians per
second. Appellants’ specification (page 8, lines 23-26)
indicates that adhesives having these properties are
“especially preferred.”
In rejecting these claims as being unpatentable over Kao
KK in view of Kenney, the examiner acknowledges (answer, page
4) that the applied references are silent as to these claim
limitations. Nevertheless, the examiner has taken the
position (answer, page 4) that
[b]ecause the Patent Office does not have facilities
for testing materials discussed in the art to
determine all the properties thereof, and given that
Applicant is not alleging that his adhesive is
novel, it appears that Applicant has merely selected
a known adhesive having a desirable transition
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007