Appeal No. 95-3985
Application No. 08/016,644
unsaturated perfluoroolefins,” Answer, page 8, lines 8-10, is
on its face correct. The issue, however, is not whether claim
1 encompasses the copolymer of Bowers, but whether the person
having ordinary skill in the art would have combined the
teachings of the Bowers reference with either of the primary
references to Imbalzano or Nakahara to obtain, the starting
material of claim 1, a crosslinked perfluoroelastomer.
Neither of these references teach a copolymer of
tetrafluoroethylene with substituted, terminally unsaturated
perfluoroolefins or omega hydroperfluoroolefins as required by
Bowers. Indeed, each teaches a copolymer of
tetrafluoroethylene with partially or fully fluorinated alkyl
vinyl ether. As we discussed supra, based on the teachings of
Bowers there would have been no expectation that irradiation
of the copolymers of either Imbalzano or Nakahara would result
in a crosslinked elastomer as opposed to a degraded copolymer.
Hence, there is no reason why the person having ordinary skill
in the art would have followed the teachings of Bowers and
irradiated a perfluoro tetra-fluoroethylene-alkyl vinyl ether
copolymer.
Accordingly, the decision of the examiner is reversed.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007