Appeal No. 95-4648
Application No. 07/952,137
(4) pouring a molten T-lactam composition containing a
polymerization catalyst and an initiator into said mold; and
(5) heating the molten T-lactam composition to obtain a
polyamide resin, thereby forming said molded article.
The examiner relies upon the following references as
evidence of obviousness:
Kobayashi et al. (Kobayashi) 4,356,228 Oct. 26, 1982
Kumazawa et al. (Kumazawa) 4,528,223 Jul. 9,
1985
Claims 28-47 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Kobayashi in view of Kumazawa (Answer, page
2).2 We affirm this rejection for reasons which follow.
OPINION
Appealed claim 28 is directed to a molded article which
is obtained by a monomer casting method comprising five
recited steps. Appellants argue that the three processes
disclosed by Kobayashi3 ”are distinct from the process steps
of forming Applicants’ molded article.” (Brief, page 5).
2The examiner’s final rejection mistakenly omitted claim 28 from
the rejection and only included claims 29-47 (see pages 1 and 2 of
the final rejection dated Jan. 12, 1994, Paper No. 27). The Brief
and the Answer are correctly directed to the rejection of claims 28
through 47 (Brief, page 2, and the Answer, page 2). Accordingly, the
claims before us on appeal are claims 28 through 47.
3See column 4, line 15 et seq.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007