Appeal No. 1997-0311
Application No. 08/340,017
Cir. 1986); In re Klosak, 455 F.2d 1077, 1080, 173 USPQ 14, 16
(CCPA 1972). Declarant Braun is silent with respect to the
unexpectedness of the declaration data.
We will not sustain the examiner's rejections of claim
12, which requires a transparent elastomer. Regarding the
rejection over Gamon, it is the examiner's position that "[a]s
no difference would exist between the identity of the
components in the reference and those in the instantly claimed
invention, it is held that it would be fully expected for the
elastomer to be transparent" (page 4 of Answer). The examiner
states that "[i]t would be fully expected for the elastomeric
coating to inherently be transparent" (page 5 of Answer). The
examiner applies the same reasoning to the rejection over
Braun and Sittenthaler, i.e., it is "the Examiner's position
that the presence of the polyvinyl alcohol inherently produces
a transparent film" (page 9 of Answer).
The flaw in the examiner's reasoning is that the examiner
has not established that the presence of polyvinyl alcohol in
the aqueous dispersions of Gamon and Braun inevitably produces
transparent elastomers. Significantly, the dispersion of
Gamon comprises a siliconate, while the dispersion of Braun
-9-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007