Appeal 2007-2154
Application 10/374,773
claim 11 is not limited to any particular molecular weight polymer by the
use of the relative term “low” and the broadly recited proportions of the
interpolymer and other polymer recited in claim 11 substantially overlap
with the proportions for these ingredients as disclosed by Betso for the
material disclosed therein. Thus, it would have been reasonable to expect
that the material disclosed and/or suggested by Betso would have properties
corresponding to the material of representative claim 11, which Appellants
have not shown to be untrue. Hence, we affirm the Examiner’s obviousness
rejection of claims 11-13, on this record.
Claims 14, 16, 17, 39-41
Appellants argue these claims as a group. Hence, we select claim 14
as the representative claim for this grouping of rejected claims.2
Claim 14 requires that the interpolymer is made from ethylene and
styrene monomers and that the other polymer in the material is a low
molecular weight polystyrene with the proviso that the interpolymer
comprises 50-70 weight percent of the material and the polystyrene
comprises 20-50 weight percent thereof.
Betso discloses polymerizing alpha-olefins with a preference for
interpolymers formed from styrene and ethylene monomers (Betso, col. 11,
ll. 60-65 and Examples). As noted above, Betso also discloses that the other
polymer can be a polystyrene. Representative claim 14 does not specify a
2 The recitation of the additional features of claims 16, 17, and 39-41, as
generally recited in the Brief does not amount to a separate argument for the
patentability of these claims. See 37 CFR § 41.37 (c)(1)(vii) (2006). In any
event, we agree with the Examiner that Betso suggests the polymer ratio of
claim 16 and materials having the properties of claims 17 and 39 for reasons
stated in the Answer and above.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013