Appeal No. 1996-3768 Page 5
Application No. 08/292,887
obviousness. The premise of the rejection is that the primary
reference to LD3-1991 discloses substrate, adhesive and
decorative cover sheet. The composite adhesive as claimed by
appellant is not specifically taught. However, the secondary
references to Formica COLORCORE and 2244 disclose the®
composite mixtures of laminating and rigid adhesives used in
different locations. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to
the person having ordinary skill in the art to modify LD3-1991
by utilization of mixtures of rigid adhesive and laminating
adhesive as required by the claimed subject matter. See Answer,
pages 4-5. See Formica COLORCORE , page 6 and 2244, FIG.1.®
The examiner however in his rejection, does not directly
address the expansion properties required by the claimed
subject matter.
Although, the subject matter of claim 1 requires, “a
coating material having expansion properties on the order of
300% different than said substrate material,” the limitation is
first addressed by the examiner in the section of the Answer,
labeled “Response to Argument.” See Answer, page 6.
The expansion properties are discussed by the examiner
only with respect to a single reference, i.e. Formica
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007