Appeal No. 1997-1219
Application 08/432,649
allyl methacrylate" as required by all of the appealed claims.
While it is true that certain of Kanda's monomers correspond
to certain of the monomers disclosed in the appellants'
specification, the fact remains that neither Kanda nor
Sanfilippo contains any teaching or suggestion of the specific
type or amount of monomer defined by the appealed claims,
namely, from about 0.2% to about 5% by weight allyl
methacrylate (which is disclosed on page 8 of the appellants'
specification as being their preferred type and amount of
monomer). It follows that we cannot sustain the examiner's §
103 rejection of claims 1, 2 and 7 as being unpatentable over
Sanfilippo in view of Kanda.
As for the § 112 rejection, it is the examiner's basic
position that the "90/10" ratio recited in appealed claim 7
fails to comply with the written description requirement set
forth in the first paragraph of this statute. According to
the appellants, this ratio is supported by the written
description in Example 6 of the subject specification which
discloses "[t]o 100 g. of aqueous dispersion solids was added
10 g. of aminoplast resin" (specification, page 16). More
specifically, the appellants interpret the disclosure "100 g.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007