Appeal No. 95-3425
Application 08/000,527
Appealed claims 11-19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as being anticipated by or, in the alternative, under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Padget.
Upon careful consideration of the opposing arguments
presented on appeal, we will not sustain the examiner’s
rejections.
We consider first the rejection of the appealed claims under
§ 102. It is fundamental that to support a rejection under
35 U.S.C. § 102 a single prior art reference must describe every
claim limitation. In the present case, independent claim 11,
upon which claims 12-18 ultimately depend, recites the positive
method step of “forming an aqueous emulsion polymer-containing
paint composition” (emphasis added). In order to qualify as a
paint according to one of ordinary skill in the art, a
composition must have certain characteristics. On the other
hand, Padget, the single reference applied by the examiner, does
not describe forming a paint composition. Rather, Padget
discloses aqueous latex copolymer compositions which are suitable
for use as contact adhesives, which “is a substance which when
coated on two substrates to be bonded enables a strong bond to be
formed between the substrates on and after initial contact at
ambient temperature without the requirement of any sustained
pressure setting time” (column 1, lines 5-12). Consequently,
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007