Appeal No. 95-3988
Application 07/986,316
hydrocarbon and a metal soap which is insoluble in the liquid hydrocarbon at a temperature of about
25EC or less. In claim 1, excess developer is removed from the developed image subsequent to
development at a temperature above the melting point of the developer. In appealed claims 87, 88 and
89, the developed electrostatic latent image is transferred to a substrate. In claim 87, the transfer is
enhanced by the application of a thermal gradient such that the adhesion of the developed image to the
substrate is greater than the adhesion of the image to the imaging member. In claim 88, the transferred
image on the substrate is subjected to pressure of from about 100 to 10,000 pounds per square inch.
In claim 89, the transferred image on the substrate is subjected to heat and pressure with a pressure roll
to enhance the penetration of the solidified developer vehicle material into the substrate. In appealed
claim 90, the developed image is transferred to a transparency substrate. According to appellants, the
use of a developer vehicle that has a melting point of at least about 25EC reduces or eliminates the use
of liquid developers with their attendant odor, emission and disposal considerations (specification, e.g.,
page 8).
The reference relied on by the examiner is:
Watanabe et al. (Watanabe) 5,229,235 Jul. 20, 19933
The examiner has rejected appealed claims 1 through 14, 17, 18, 20, 25 through 42, 44
through 48, 79 through 83 and 87 through 90 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Watanabe. We affirm with respect to claims 1 through 14, 17, 18, 20, 25 through 42, 44 through 484
and 87 through 90, but reverse with respect to claims 79 through 83.
Rather than reiterate the respective positions advanced by the examiner and appellants, we
refer to the examiner’s answer and to appellants’ principal and reply briefs for a complete exposition
thereof.
3According to Watanabe, the effective filing date of this reference is June 15, 1989.
4The examiner has withdrawn the ground of rejection the appealed claims under § 103 as being
unpatentable over of Watanabe in view of copending application 08/013,132 and of the ground of
rejection of appealed claim 90 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph (answer, page 2).
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007