Appeal No. 1997-1018
Application No. 08/369,944
composition but fails to disclose the vapor transmission rate
of the adhesive layer,” citing the abstract; page 5, l. 5-page
7,
l. 23; page 8, l. 19-page 9, l. 6 (Answer, page 4). The
examiner finds that the amount of hydroxylated esters of
methacrylate disclosed by Howes is 0.1 to 20% by weight and
this range “is clearly set forth on page 6 of Howes (EP).”
(Answer, page 7). The examiner’s position is that the
adhesive composition of Howes inherently has the vapor
transmission rate recited in claim 21 on appeal (id.).
Appellants argue that Howes is directed to a different
composition than that claimed, namely that the amount of
hydroxyethyl methacrylate in Howes is disclosed as 0.3 to 5%
by weight while the lower limit of this monomer recited in
claim
21 is 15% by weight (Brief, page 3; see claim 21, component
b)).
“To anticipate a claim, a prior art reference must
disclose every limitation of the claimed invention, either
explicitly or inherently. [Citation omitted].” In re
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007