Appeal No. 2003-0577
Application No. 09/194,378
of a polyolefin that is incompatible with film
Fraction A.
The examiner relies on the following prior art references
as evidence of unpatentability:
Weinberger et al. 5,650,223 Jul. 22, 1997
(Weinberger) (filed Jun. 11, 1996)
Brown et al. 5,662,978 Sep. 2, 1997
(Brown) (filed Sep. 1, 1995)
Cardinal et al. WO 95/16746 Jun. 22, 1995
(Cardinal)(published
PCT application)
Claims 27 through 36 on appeal stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Cardinal in view of Brown
or Weinberger. (Examiner’s answer mailed Nov. 5, 2002, paper
26, pages 3-5.)
We reverse this rejection. Although we are in substantial
agreement with the appellants’ position as stated in the appeal
brief filed Aug. 19, 2002 (paper 25), we add the following
comments for emphasis.
Cardinal, the principal prior art reference, describes a
thermoplastic composition containing a mixture of: (a) a block
copolyether ester, a block copolyether amide, and/or a
polyurethane; (b) a thermoplastic homo-, co-, or terpolymer that
is incompatible with (a); and (c) a compatibilizer. (Page 1,
lines 30-36.) According to Cardinal, components (a), (b), and
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007