Appeal No. 1996-2113
Application No. 08/192,220
blocked TMDQ of Parker would not have been present in a rubber
formulation in an amount effective to reduce the rate at which
insoluble sulfur converts to a migratable form of sulfur, as
required by claim 1 on appeal.
The examiner has applied Massie “to show employment of
anhydrides in rubber formulations is well known in the art.”
(Answer, page 3). Massie discloses the relative equivalency
of bicyclo [2.2.1]-5-heptene-2,3-dicarboxylic acid and its
anhydride to retard incipient vulcanization or scorch during
the mixing, forming and storage stages of rubber processing
and to improve the action of accelerator compounds (col. 1,
ll. 1-11; col. 2, ll. 1-11; col. 2, l. 55-col. 3, l. 12; and
see the Brief, page 8). The examiner has failed to provide
any support for his statement that “derivatives such as
anhydride would be expected to be compatible with sulfur”
(Answer, page 3). “It is well established that before a
conclusion of obviousness may be made based on a combination
of references, there must have been a reason, suggestion or
motivation to lead an inventor to combine those references.”
Pro-Mold and Tool Co. v. Great Lakes Plastics Inc., 75 F.3d
1568, 1573, 37 USPQ2d 1626, 1629 (Fed. Cir. 1996). The
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007