Appeal No. 96-0596
Application No. 08/069,887
facie case of unpatentability.” In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443,
1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992). On this record,
the examiner has failed to show that the objective teachings
of the applied prior art would have led one of ordinary skill
in this art to modify the amounts of the components, e.g., to
modify the maximum amount of inorganic metal compound (filler)
in Woodhams from the disclosed maximum of 10% by weight to the
minimum amount of 50% by weight recited in appealed claim 1.
Although large amounts of fillers have been used in the prior
art for the backing of carpet tiles, Woodhams is not directed 4
to backings useful in carpet tiles. Accordingly, the examiner
must show why one of ordinary skill in Woodhams’ art would
have been led to modify the amounts of the disclosed
components in the bitumen composition.
On this record, the examiner has also failed to establish
the equivalence of the acidic terminally functionalized
polyethylene wax of Woodhams and the acid functionalized
polyolefin with a plurality of pendant acid groups as recited
4See European Patent No. 309,674, cited at page 3 of the
specification, and made of record in parent Application No.
07/660,296.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007