Appeal No. 95-0999
Application 07/925,347
claimed curing agent having an imino- or enamino-functional
linkage. See Brief, page 7. Nor do appellants dispute the
following factual finding:
The weight ratio of polyisocyanate to curing
agent of [the applied prior art] is 9:1 to 1:9 and
the preferred ratio of isocyanate groups to
isocyanate reactive groups is between 0.70 and 1.90
([see, e.g. Gillis,] column 21, lines 3-11). Note
that the curative must include imino groups as
defined at [e.g. Gillis,] column 3, line 51 to
column 4, line 7. The instant claims recite
comprising and therefore do not exclude the
additional isocyanate reactive groups of the
patentee. The number of isocyanate groups to imino
groups falls within that of the appellant’s claims
in the upper portion of the patentee’s preferred
range of isocyanate groups to isocyanate reactive
groups where the isocyanate groups other than imino
and enamino groups are disregarded as can be clearly
seen mathematically. Furthermore, based upon the
weight ratio of polyisocyanate to curing agent
([see, e.g., Gillis]column 21, lines 3-8[)] and the
molecular weights and functionalities of the
reactants ([see, e.g., Gillis,] column 3, line 39 to
column 4, line 21[)], it is clear mathematically
that a large majority of the compositions
encompassed by [the applied prior art] will have 2
or more isocyanate groups per imino group. (Compare
Answer, pages 4 and 5, with Brief, pages 7-12).
Given the preference for the limited molecular number
ratios, inclusive of the claimed ratios, we find that the
claimed molecular number ratios would have been readily
envisaged by one skilled in the art from reading the
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007