Appeal No. 95-2233
Application 07/978,014
terminology in the claims is misdescriptive and does not
particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter
which the applicants regard as their invention. For example, “a
copolymer of polyvinylpyrrolidone and vinyl acetate” recited in
claim 4 and encompassed in claim 2, is incorrect. The correct
terminology is “a copolymer of vinyl pyrrolidone and vinyl
acetate” as described in the specification, Example 2.
Furthermore, “a mixture of the graft copolymer of polyvinyl-
pyrrolidone and butene, and vinyl acetate” recited in claim 5 is
incorrect. That claim should recite instead “a mixture of the
graft copolymer of polyvinylpyrrolidone and butene and a
copolymer of vinylpyrrolidone and vinyl acetate”. Again, for the
same reasons, we find that the mixture of “graft copolymer and
vinyl acetate” recited in claim 6 is misdescriptive. Instead,
applicants should recite a mixture of graft copolymer and a
copolymer of vinylpyrrolidone and vinyl acetate.
Referring again to the specification, applicants use the
terminology “a copolymer of vinylpyrrolidone and vinyl acetate”
and “polyvinylpyrrolidone grafted with butene” or mixtures
thereof. See the specification, page 7, Examples 2, 3 and 4. If
the claims were amended to limit the binder, using that same
terminology, it follows that the rejection entered under 37 CFR
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007