Appeal No. 96-3862
Application No. 08/189,861
We make reference to the examiner's answer(s) for the
examiner's reasoning in support of the rejection, and to the
appellants' brief(s) for the appellants' arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellants' specification and
claims, to the applied prior art reference, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the
examiner. As a consequence of our review, we find ourselves
in agreement with the examiner and will affirm this rejection
for reasons which follow.
Braslaw discloses a recovery method for polyurethane
scrap material including a first step of using low molecular
weight aliphatic diols to thermally dissolve (decompose) the
polyurethane material at temperatures up to 210°C (column 1).
Additionally, Braslaw describes the method step of vacuum
distilling the product of the first step at a temperature of
about 130°C in a rotating film evaporator in the presence of
added polyol (column 4). Braslaw discloses that the recovered
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007