Appeal No. 95-3201
Application No. 08/083,957
melt-intractable." Consequently, we agree with appellants that
the claimed cellulose is a non-thermoplastic, non-chemically
modified polymer. It is this claimed cellulose component that
is not disclosed or suggested in the Freed disclosure.
Although there is no dispute that Freed discloses a
polymeric blend comprising claimed components (b)(i) and
(b)(ii), Freed does not teach the inclusion of the claimed
natural and melt-intractable cellulose. While the examiner
points to Freed's disclosure of cellulosics as a component in
the reference polymeric blend, appellants correctly point out
that the cellulosics disclosed by Freed are one of many
thermoplastic polymers described. Since Freed provides no
teaching or suggestion of employing a non-thermoplastic
cellulosic material in the polymeric blend, we cannot agree
with the examiner's legal conclusion that the claimed
polymeric blend would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art. While the examiner contends that appellants
have not furnished proof that the cellulosics of Freed are
neither "natural" nor "melt-intractable," Freed himself
describes the cellulosics as thermoplastic, which would
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007