Ex parte WEAVER et al. - Page 4




               Appeal No. 96-0971                                                                                                    
               Application 07/888,268                                                                                                


                                              THE REFERENCE OF RECORD                                                               

                       As evidence of obviousness, the examiner relies upon the following reference of record.                       

               Britain (Ciba-Geigy)                           1,477,396               June 22, 1977                                  
               (Britain Patent Specification)                                                                                        
                                                       THE REJECTION                                                                 

                       Claims 39 through 44, 46, and 48 through 53 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as                           

               unpatentable over Ciba-Geigy.                                                                                         

                                                            OPINION                                                                  

                       Appellants have not stated in their brief whether claims 39 through 44,  46 and 48 through 53                 

               stand or fall together.  Accordingly, we shall treat the claims as standing or falling together. We select            

               claim 39 as representative of appellants’ claimed subject matter and limit our discussion thereto. See 37             

               C.F.R. §  1.192 (c)(5)( 1994).                                                                                        

                       We have carefully considered all of the arguments advanced by the appellants and the examiner                 

               and agree with appellants that the aforementioned rejection is not well founded.  Accordingly, we do                  

               not sustain the rejection.                                                                                            

                       The claimed subject matter before us is drawn to a composition which provides for the                         

               incorporation of a colorant, “while said resin is in a molten state.”  However,  there is no disclosure or            

               suggestion in Ciba-Geigy for incorporation of their anthraquinone dye in the molten state.                            




                                                                 4                                                                   





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007