Appeal No. 1997-1997
Application No. 08/263,496
the large quantity of MDI and its greater reactivity, the
polyol is going to combine with the MDI and not the polymeric
MDI," and that, therefore, "appellant's invention represents
the same mixture as Carroll's" (page 3 of Answer), the
examiner has not provided any evidentiary factual support for
this assertion. In our view, the examiner has not established
on this record that it is reasonable to conclude that the
claimed prepolymer, which is the reaction product of three
components, is essentially the same as the two-component
reaction product of Carroll.
We now turn to the examiner's rejection of claims 8-17
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Watts. Although Watts discloses
the preparation of a polyisocyanate prepolymer by reacting the
same three components that are employed by appellant, i.e., a
polyoxypropylene polyether polyol, diphenylmethane
diisocyanate and a polymethylene polyphenyl polyisocyanate,
the prepolymer of Watts does not have the claimed "overall NCO
content of from 22 weight percent to 31 weight percent" (claim
8). Rather, Watts specifically teaches that the prepolymer
has an NCO content of from 2 to 15 percent by weight,
preferably 2 to 12 percent by weight (column 2, lines 27 et
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007