Appeal No. 96-0892
Application No. 08/264,870
obviousness for the claimed subject matter. Accordingly, we
will not sustain the examiner's rejection.
The examiner relies upon Hähnke for disclosing an
acrylonitrile polymer comprising a titanium dioxide delustrant
and a benzimidazole optical brightener. However, the flaw in
the examiner's reasoning is that although Hähnke discloses a
class of dyestuffs that may comprise a benzimidazole moiety,
the examiner has not established that the referenced dyestuffs
qualify as optical brighteners. Appellants cite the Man-Made
Fiber and Textile Dictionary for the art-recognized
definitions of "dyestuff" and "optical brightener" (see page 5
of Brief). According to appellants, a "dyestuff" is defined
as "substances which add color to textiles by absorption into
the fiber," whereas "optical brightener" is defined as "a
colorless compound which, when applied to fabric, absorbs the
ultraviolet rays in light and emits them in the visible
spectrum." Unfortunately, the examiner has not addressed this
cogent argument made by appellants. Consequently, in the
absence of any factually-based rationale by the examiner that
the benzimidazole-containing dyestuffs of Hähnke meet the
definition of an optical brightener, we must conclude that the
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007