Appeal No. 97-3608
Application 08/533,640
illustrative of the appealed claims and reads as follows:
1. A 100% solids polyurethane adhesive composition for
bonding roofing materials comprising:
a) a first component selected from the group consisting of:
monomeric diisocyanates selected from the group consisting of
toluene diisocyanate, methylene diphenyl diisocyanate, hexamethyl
diisocyanate, isophorone diisocyanate, and hydrogenated methylene
diphenyl diisocyanate; polymeric methylene diphenyl isocyanates
formed by the reaction of one of said monomeric diisocyanates; or
a prepolymer formed by the reaction of one of said monomeric
diisocyanates or polymeric isocyanates with a polyol selected
from the group consisting of polyether and polyester polyols;
b) a second component comprising from about 50 to 60% by
weight of a polyether polyol, from about 1 to 5% by weight of a
reinforcing diol, from about 5 to 15% by weight of a hydroxyl-
terminated homopolymer of polybutadiene, and a tackifier; wherein
the ratio of isocyanate groups in said first component to the
ratio of hydroxyl groups in said second component is from about
0.5:1 to 1.5:1, and wherein said adhesive composition provides a
water-tight seal upon bonding to roofing materials.
The references relied on by the examiner are:
Harada 4,607,439 Aug. 26, 1986
Gilch et al. (Gilch) 4,661,542 Apr. 28, 1987
Bandlish 4,847,319 Jul. 11, 1989
Claims 1 and 3-12 stand rejected under 35 USC § 103 as
unpatentable over Harada in view of Gilch and Bandlish. We have
carefully considered the entire record, including the appellants'
position as set forth in the briefs and the examiner's position
as set forth in the answer, and we have decided that we will not
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007