Appeal No. 1996-2113
Application No. 08/192,220
examiner has not established any convincing reason, suggestion
or motivation for combining the references as proposed (see
the Brief, page 10). The examiner has only made general
statements that acids and anhydrides are normally equivalent
“when used for rubber processing” (Answer, page 3). The
examiner has not addressed the specific disclosure and
teachings of Massie that a specific anhydride and acid are
relatively equivalent when used to retard incipient
vulcanization or scorch and improve the action of accelerator
compounds. In this context, the examiner must provide
specific reasons or suggestions for combining the teachings
and disclosures of Massie with the primary references, none of
which are directed to retarding incipient vulcanization and
scorch and improvement of the action of accelerator compounds.
In re Dembiczak, 175 F.3d 994, 999, 50 USPQ2d 1614, 1617 (Fed.
Cir. 1999)(“[T]he showing [of evidence of a suggestion,
teaching, or motivation to combine] must be clear and
particular.”). Accordingly, even assuming arguendo that the
primary references disclose or suggest the reaction product of
dihydroquinolines and acids, the examiner has not established
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007