Appeal No. 2002-0679 6
Application No. 08/684,351
The Rejection under § 103(a)
The rejection of the claims as being unpatentable over Smith in view of Martin and
Kralik ultimately relies upon the disclosure of Martin for its teaching of a layer of
polyurethane next to a layer of ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer. Smith is directed to a
bladder for holding pressurized air in a ball. See column 1, lines 11-12 and column 2,
lines 8-9. The bladder contains a series of thermoplastic elastomeric bands over an inner
core bonded together. See column 2, lines 10-12. The bladder comprises an inner core
which is preferably made of polyester or polyether urethane. See column 2, lines 52-57.
We find a disclosure of an alternative bladder wherein an inner core made of saran
(polyvinylidene chloride) and at least two outer bands of polyurethane material form a
bladder. See column 5, line 62 to column 6, line 3. There is however no disclosure of a
laminate of ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer and thermoplastic polyurethane.
Kralik is likewise directed to an inflatable game ball having a bladder formed of at
least two layers of material. See column 1, lines 37-48. The bladder preferably contains
an outer and inner layer both made of polyurethane. See column 2, lines 51-53. There is
no disclosure of any polymers other than polyurethane.
Accordingly, this rejection ultimately relies upon Martin for its teaching and
disclosure of layers of polyurethane and ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer. Each of the
independent claims before us requires contact at a temperature of 300o to about 465o F
and requires that the contact “consists essentially of hydrogen bonding.” See claims 1, 7,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007