Ex Parte BILLMERS et al - Page 2




          Appeal No. 2002-2261                                                        
          Application No. 09/568,111                                                  


               a) a hydrophobically modified high amylose starch where                
          the starch has an amylose content of at least 40% by weight and             
          is modified with a hydrocarbon group of 6 to 18 carbon atoms, and           
               b) from about 1 to 10% by weight, based on the weight of               
          dry starch, of hydrolyzed polyvinyl alcohol having a degree of              
          hydrolysis of from about 88% to 99%.                                        
               The examiner relies upon the following references as                   
          evidence of obviousness:                                                    
          Lacz et al. (Lacz '473)         5,567,473           Oct. 22, 1996           
          Schlom et al. (Schlom)          5,833,755           Nov. 10, 1998           
          Lacz et al. (Lacz '450)         5,254,450           Oct. 19, 1993           
               Appellants' claimed invention is directed to a paper coating           
          composition comprising the recited high amylose starch and                  
          hydrolyzed polyvinyl alcohol.  According to appellants'                     
          specification, the coating composition "provides good barrier               
          properties when applied to paper" (page 1, line 3).  The                    
          specification explains that "[b]arrier properties refer to an               
          increase in the resistance of paper to various materials such as            
          water, air, oil and grease, and also higher surface strength (wax           
          pick) and resistance to crack-on-fold" (page 3, lines 6-8).                 
               Appealed claims 1-5, 7, 8, 11, and 14-21 stand rejected                
          under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Lacz '450 in               
          view of Lacz '473.  Claims 6, 9, 10, 12, 13 and 22 stand rejected           
          under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the stated                 
          combination of references further in view of Schlom.                        

                                         -2-                                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007