Appeal No. 2002-0983
Application No. 09/399,890
material.” (Answer, page 4.) The examiner further alleges that
“metal oxides, calcium carbonate, and high melting polymers are
all considered high temperature volatile particles because they
give off vapors at high temperatures.”
The examiner’s position lacks discernible merit. The
present specification expressly defines the “high temperature
volatile particulate” materials as particles that volatilize and
form numerous cells created by expansion of gas within the
molten resin. (Page 6, lines 24-30.) Here, the examiner has
not identified any evidence to support the allegation that the
fillers described in Topolkaraev are in fact “high temperature
volatile particulate” materials as recited in the appealed
claims. Additionally, we find no teaching, motivation, or
suggestion in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary
skill in the art to combine the teachings of Topolkaraev, which
is directed to flushable personal care items, with the teachings
of Doyle, which is directed to building wraps. Moreover, the
examiner has not pointed to any evidence to establish that the
polymers disclosed in Topolkaraev for flushable personal care
items (column 5, line 20 to column 7, line 26), when combined
with the disclosed fillers, would be operable as a primer layer
in a building wrap as described in Doyle.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007