Appeal No. 2004-0977
Application No. 10/043,762
Claim 1 is representative of the subject matter on appeal
and is set forth below:
1. A method for predicting the outdoor
durability of a first coating relative to the outdoor
durability of at least one other of a set of coatings,
all of said coatings having been formed from aqueous
coating compositions comprising a thermoplastic
emulsion polymer, said method comprising exposing said
set of coatings to the same ambient outdoor conditions
for the same period of time, subjecting said exposed
coatings to a chemiluminescence test, and comparing
the result of said chemiluminescence test performed on
said first coating to the corresponding result for at
least one other of said set of coatings.
The examiner relies upon the following references as
evidence of unpatentability:
Okazaki et al. (Okazaki) 3,891,451 Jun. 24, 1975
Dudler, et al., “Use of Chemiluminescence to the Study of
Photostability of Automotive Coatings”, Polymer Degradation and
Stability, No. 60 (1998), pp. 35-365.
Claims 1-8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
obvious over Okazaki in view of Dudler.
On page 5 of the brief, appellants state that the claims
stand or fall together. We therefore consider claim 1 in this
appeal. 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7) and (8)(2003).
OPINION
For the reasons set forth in the answer, and below, we
affirm the rejection.
We refer to pages 3-5 of the answer regarding the
examiner’s position in this rejection.
Beginning on page 5 of the brief, appellants argue that
Okazaki fails to teach or suggest the use or need for any
alternative test, and merely compares related samples within a
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007