situ to accomplish the objective of maintaining sufficient
internal pressure within the resin system capsule over an
extended period of time to enable the capsule to maintain its
stiffness or rigidity (col. 1, lines 64-68 and col. 2, lines 1-
3). The internal pressure created provides for almost an
equilibrium pressure state that adds significantly to the shelf
life of the first component of the two-part resin system (col.
1, lines 50-57).
Hence, Talbot teaches to utilize carbon dioxide to promote
the shelf life of the first component of the two-part resin
system.
In this context, we agree with the examiner that Bivens in
view of Talbot sets forth a prima facie case of obviousness in
connection with claim 1. That is, sufficient motivation exists
to include the CO2 generating components of Talbot in the first
component of the two-part system of Bivens in order to enhance
the shelf life of the first component of Bivens. This would
result in a composition having a compressible substance therein.
We do not agree with the examiner that Bivens in view of
Talbot sets forth a prima facie case with respect to claim 18
because claim 18, a process claim, requires the process step of
ĉombining~ a grouting composition with a compressible substance.
Because the carbon dioxide in Talbot is generated in situ, this
ĉombining~ step is not taught.
In view of the above, we affirm the rejection involving
claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. ~ 103 as being unpatentable over Bivens
in view of Talbot, and further in view Gebauer or Yamamoto, and
further in view of Ceska.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007