Appeal No. 1999-2511
Application 08/847,414
OPINION
The examiner finds that Asnes discloses a heat-releasable
adhesive layer which may comprise an acrylic-based resin “as
recited in claims 25, 39" (Answer, page 4). The examiner also
finds that Parker discloses a heat-releasable layer which may be
an acrylic-based resin (Answer, page 5).2
Appellants argue that none of the references disclose an
acrylic resin adhesive modified by adding less than 1% isocyanate
as required by the claims on appeal (Brief, pages 12-13). The
examiner has made no obviousness conclusion regarding the
composition of the adhesive (Answer, page 6) but, in reply to
appellant’s argument, construes the claimed “less than 1%
isocyanate resin” as encompassing zero%, thus reading on the
acrylic resin adhesive disclosed by the applied references
(Answer, page 11). We disagree with the examiner’s claim
construction for the following reasons. Claim 25 on appeal
positively recites that isocyanate resin is present (“the
adhesive comprising a mixture of an acrylic resin and an
isocyanate resin,” italics added). If this claim was construed
2 The examiner does not make any finding from Liebe
regarding heat-releasable adhesive layers (see the Answer in its
entirety).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007