Appeal No. 96-2504
Application 08/318,328
22, as well as the section 103 rejection of all the appealed
claims for essentially the reasons expressed in the answer.
We consider first the examiner's rejection of claims 7-
10, 13-16 and 19-22 under 35 U.S.C. § 102. Appellants do not
dispute
the examiner's factual determination that Hombach describes
coating a substrate with a composition containing a hydrophil-
ically-modified polyisocyanate of the kind claimed, including
one having the recited viscosity. Appellants' principal
contention on appeal is that the claim language "a binder
which consists essentially of a hydrophilically-modified
polyisocyanate component . . ." does not allow for the
presence of the adhesive components disclosed by Hombach.
However, we are in full agreement with the examiner that the
claim language "coating composition containing water and a
binder which consist essen-tially of" defines a coating
composition which comprises the recited ingredients in
addition to non-specified components. Appellants do not
challenge the examiner's position that the claim term
"containing" is equivalent to the term "comprises". On this
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007