Appeal No. 2006-2677 Page 5
Application No. 10/346,099
Appellants argue that “Holubka does not disclose the limitation that the polyol
monomer is reacted with a polyisocyanate. In one step, Holubka reacts a polyol (epoxy-
diol adduct) with a half-blocked diisocyanate (col. 3, lines 66-67). In another step,
Holubka reacts a polyol having a blocked diisocyanate group (chain-extendable,
crosslinkable urethane modified polyhydroxy oligomer) with a curing agent. . . . [S]ince
a blocked isocyanate group is not an isocyanate group, there is no disclosure of a
reaction of a polyol with a polyisocyanate. There is only a reaction of a polyol with a
monoisocyanate.” Appeal Brief, page 6.
We agree with Appellants that a half-blocked diisocyanate is not a
polyisocyanate. As discussed above, an isocyanate is represented by the general
formula R-N=C=O. The encyclopedia entry for isocyanate included in the Evidence
Appendix indicates that isocyanates are “very reactive compounds” that react with
alcohols to form urethanes. A blocked isocyanate is one that has been reacted with a
monofunctional blocking agent. Holubka, col. 6, lines 14-17. Although a blocked
isocyanate can be de-blocked, the blocked isocyanate presumably does not have the
general formula R-N=C=O, nor does it have the reactivity with alcohol that an unblocked
isocyanate has. Id., col. 6, lines 17-21, 35-39, and 61-67. Thus, we agree with
Appellants that a half-blocked diisocyanate does not have two or more isocyanate
groups. As a result, we agree with Appellants that Holubka does not describe reacting
a polyol monomer with a polyisocyanate, as recited in claims 21 and 31.
With regard to claim 9, the examiner argues that Holubka discloses “a thermoset
formed by reacting a polyisocyanate with a polyol monomer (column 3, lines 64 through
column 4, line 20); wherein the polyol monomer comprises the formula [of claim 9]
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013