Appeal No. 1996-2572
Application No. 08/192,077
Daily contemplates the addition of a methylene donor to the
resin mix and that Daily’s composition may include suitable2
catalysts for the resole resin. However, in stating that3
Daily differs primarily from the appealed claimed process “in
that the methylene donor is not limited to addition via the
resole component and the resole catalyst is not limited to
addition via the resorcinolic component” (final rejection,
page 3, emphasis added), the examiner improperly implied that
Daily suggests appellants’ claimed method steps A and B in
appealed claim 1 which respectively require preparation of a
first component including both the resole resin and a
methylene donor and a second component including both a
resorcinolic resin and a catalyst for the resole resin
component. In effect, appellants’ invention as defined by the
appealed method claims involves the recognition that the
“catalyst” for the resorcinolic resin (i.e., the methylene
donor) may be precombined with the resole resin to produce a
2See Daily at column 2, lines 53-57; column 4, lines 20-
23; and working examples 12-19 at columns 7-10.
3See Daily at column 3, lines 46-48 and column 4, lines
15-19.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007