Appeal No. 95-1622
Application 07/890,593
page 6), the only coated substrates disclosed in Wright which contain a copolymer having both reactive
nucleophilic groups and energy sensitive organometallic groups are those of Wright Embodiment I. As
we discussed above, we cannot determine whether the articles of Wright Examples 1-12 are identical or
substantially identical to the articles of appealed claim 2, but we do find that one of ordinary skill in this
art would have modified the copolymers in these examples such that the ratio of energy sensitive
organometallic groups to reactive nucleophilic groups would be higher and thus there would be a greater
concentration of energy sensitive organometallic groups that would not be involved in the crosslinking
reaction. In any event, the crosslinking of the copolymer upon exposure to radiation energy would
inactivate the nucleophilic groups as we discussed above.
Thus, the principal issue remains as to whether the claimed and Wright articles are necessarily or
inherently, identical or substantially identical or whether the modification of the Wright Examples as
taught in that reference was within the ordinary skill in this art. We have carefully considered the
McCormick declaration but fail to find therein objective evidence that patentably distinguishes the
claimed invention over Wright under either § 102(b) or § 103. We find that declaration Example A (¶
12) does not provide a side-by-side comparison of a claimed article with an article prepared according
to Wright Examples 1, 2 and 9, which Wright Examples fall within Wright Embodiment I. As we
discussed above, in Embodiment I and in these Wright Examples, the coating applied to at least a
portion of one surface of the substrate having basic reactive groups is a copolymer prepared from at
least organometallic group containing monomers and nucleophilic group containing monomers. Thus,
declaration
Example A differs from these teachings of Wright in three significant respects: (1) the “[s]olutions 1-3”
serving as “models for Wright’s Examples” contain the nucleophilic “4-t-butylpyridine” (¶ 12), which is
a non-monomeric mononucleophilic compound, rather than the monomeric mononucleophilic “4-
vinylpyridine” (e.g., Wright Example 1); (2) the compound “MeCpMn(CO)3” used in these solutions
(¶¶ 11 and 12) appears to be methylcyclopentandienyl manganese tricarbonyl which is also a non-
- 13 -
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007