Appeal No. 1997-2233
Application No. 08/365,384
during the reaction to determine the schedule for adding
monomer. Further, even if we assume that Wingler somehow
suggests predetermining the addition schedule, as the examiner
asserts, there is no suggestion to do this by using
appellants' iterative approach in accordance with the
particular set of equations recited in the claim at issue.
For the foregoing reasons, the decision of the examiner
is reversed.
No period for taking any subsequent action in connection
with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a).
REVERSED
MARC L. CAROFF )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
BRADLEY R. GARRIS ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007