Appeal No. 95-5125
Application No. 07/891,300
examiner requires the presence of a polymer, “having side
chains linked to the main chains.” See column 1, lines 37-38.
The polymers are preferably crosslinked between C-C atoms in
the main chain or pendant functionalities in the side chains.
See column 1, line 35 through column 2, line 64. These
definitions necessarily preclude the presence of polyethylene
oxide, as understood by those of ordinary skill in the art,
from being among those polymers disclosed by Cheshire’s for
his polyelectrolyte. Nor do we find any teachings in Cheshire
that can be construed as suggesting the presence of
polyethylene oxide.
For the above reasons, we conclude that the examiner has
not carried his burden of establishing a prima facie case of
obviousness of the invention recited in any of appellant’s
claims. Consequently, we do not sustain the rejection under
35 U.S.C. § 103.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007