Appeal No. 1997-1907 Page 4
Application No. 08/265,369
(a) a water-dispersible isocyanate-terminated
polyurethane prepolymer having an NCO content of between 2.1
and 10% by weight,
(b) an organic polyisocyanate adduct mixture comprising a
uretdione and a isocyanurate and having an average isocyanate
functionality of between 2.1 and 4.0, and
(c) an active hydrogen-containing chain extender.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Mosbach et al. (Mosbach) 5,098,983 Mar.
24, 1992
Coogan et al. (Coogan) 5,169,895 Dec. 08,
1992
Claims 1-14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Coogan in view of Mosbach.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellants' specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the
examiner. In so doing, we find ourselves in agreement with
appellants that the examiner fails to establish a prima facie
case of obviousness for the claimed subject matter.2
2We note that it is the examiner who bears the initial
burden of presenting a prima facie case of obviousness in
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007