Appeal No. 1996-2690
Application 07/967,787
binders in the art." Similarly, Ulman also describes the poling of the polymer binding
precursor prior to crosslinking (column 26, lines 32-34).
Appellants, additionally, argue that (Principal Brief, page 8):
[t]here is no disclosure or suggestion in Ulman et al. of making
the combination of host polymer and guest crosslinking agent
employed in Appellants' claimed method.
We do not agree. Ulman discloses various polymer materials, including those
having NLO components attached there to in a process intended to yield a product of the
type claimed. As we have discussed above, one such technique involves the use of a
crosslinking agent, in the presence of the linear polymer where the combination is
subjected to an electric field to pole the combination and then subjecting this poled
combination to electromagnetic radiation in order to effect crosslinking of the combination.
The use of a particular linear polymer in this process has not been shown to be critical.
Further, Ulman teaches the advantage of using the linear polymer having the NLO bound
thereto. (Column 24, lines 27-32). This is sufficient, in our opinion, to have reasonably
suggested, to those of ordinary skill in this art, the use of a polymer of the type claimed, in
combination with a crosslinking agent, in a process where the combination is subjected to
an electric field and subsequently crosslinked in a manner to arrive at a crosslinked
product having the desired second order nonlinear optical properties which is Unman
intended product.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007