Appeal No. 2000-0027 Page 15
Application No. 09/072,190
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the
examiner to reject claim 5, and claims 6 and 7 dependent
thereon, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
Claims 1 to 4 and 8 to 11
Independent claim 1 includes the step of mixing
emulsifier to the aggregate, roof waste granules and
rejuvenating oil. Independent claim 8 includes the step of
mixing emulsifier to the combined material mixture of
granules, aggregate and rejuvenating oil.
We have reviewed the references to Grzybowski and
Bladykas but find nothing therein which makes up for the
deficiency of Gaudio discussed above regarding claim 8.
Likewise, the teachings of the applied prior art are not
suggestive of the above-noted mixing steps of claims 1 and 8.
Accordingly, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1
and 8, and claims 2 to 4 and 9 to 11 dependent thereon, under
35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
Claim 12
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007