Appeal No. 96-3019
Application No. 08/386,136
page 7. The disclosures of Sebald and Sezi, and Ito(‘628) are
drawn respectively to pendant carboxylic acid esters generally
and t-butyl methacrylate esters specifically. In contrast, we
find that Leuschner compares t-butyl methacrylate with t-
butoxy carbonyl imide. See the illustration for P and P on2 3
page 222 of exhibit A.
Furthermore, in comparing P and P of Leuschner,2 3
appellants compare a polymer having 20 mole percent t-butoxy
carbonyl imide with a polymer having 60 mole percent t-butyl
methacrylate. Accordingly, in view of the very substantial
difference in mole percent of the functional groups, we
further find P and P of Leuschner to be an inappropriate side2 3
by side comparison. Moreover, even were the evidence
otherwise persuasive, the single example presented by
appellants is not commensurate in scope with the claimed
subject matter. Based on the record before us, we find that
the results demonstrated in the Leuschner exhibit are not
based on the closest prior art or commensurate in scope with
the appealed claims and, are entitled to little, if any,
weight with respect to the patentability of the claimed
subject matter over the combined teachings of Sebald, Sezi and
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007