Ex parte HSU et al. - Page 2




                 Appeal No. 96-0607                                                                                                                     
                 Application No. 08/134,778                                                                                                             


                          According to appellants, the invention relates to a                                                                           
                 corrosion resistant latex composition comprising an emulsion                                                                           
                 in water of a core/shell polymer prepared by free radical                                                                              
                 emulsion polymerization techniques wherein one of the monomers                                                                         
                 used in the production of the polymer comprises a salt of 2-                                                                           
                 acrylamido-2-methylpropane sulfonic acid  and wherein the free          2                                                              
                 radical polymerization is conducted in the presence of a                                                                               
                 diphenyl sulfonate surfactant (brief, page 2).  Appellants’                                                                            
                 latex composition is useful as a “waterborne coating binder”                                                                           
                 in paints (specification, pages 2-3).                                                                                                  
                          Appellants state that claims 14, 16, 30, and 32 “have                                                                         
                 issues which support separate patentability” (brief, page 2).                                                                          
                 We presume that appellants mean that claims 8-13, 15, 24-29                                                                            
                 and 31 are considered to be one group while claims 14, 16, 30                                                                          
                 and 32 are considered as the second group, with the claims of                                                                          
                 each group standing or falling together.  Appellants present                                                                           
                 specific, substantive reasons for the separate patentability                                                                           




                          2The monomer “2-acrylamido-2-methylpropane sulfonic acid”                                                                     
                 is hereafter referred to by its acronym “AMPS”.  See the                                                                               
                 specification, page 2, last paragraph.                                                                                                 
                                                                           2                                                                            





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007