Appeal No. 1996-2874
Application No. 08/027,849
As a final point, we note that claim 6 has not been
finally rejected. It appears that the examiner inadvertently
has not extended the prior rejections on appeal to claim 6.
Upon return of this application, the examiner is advised to
determine whether the subject matter of claim 6 is patentable
over the applied prior art.
We also note that in the Background of the Invention
section of the application, appellant states that known
thermal or cold curing of an outer layer containing a
thermoplastic material has certain problems. See
specification, pages 2 and 3. Appellant’s proffered evidence,
e.g., Sax, also indicates that radiation curing (light curing)
is a well known alternative curing technique to thermal
curing. Upon return of this application, the examiner is to
determine whether such problems were known or observable to
those skilled in the art at the time of the invention and if
known or observable, whether such knowledge or observation
would have led one of ordinary skill in the art to employ an
alternative low temperature conventional radiation curing to
arrive at the claimed product.
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007