Appeal No. 1997-2330 Page 4
Application No. 08/398,315
dispersion having a glass transition temperature less than the glass transition temperature of the latex
polymer. This polyurethane dispersion is admixed with the
film-forming latex polymer. The claims further require the presence of a water-soluble coalescent and
the absence of water-insoluble coalescent.
The Rejection over Floyd
In regard to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)/103 over Floyd, we agree with the
Examiner that Floyd discloses aqueous coating compositions which comprise film-forming latex
polymers and aqueous polyurethane dispersions. However, the claims also require the presence of at
least one water-soluble coalescent in the aqueous coating composition. We agree with Appellants that
the Examiner has failed to establish that Floyd contains a teaching or suggestion of including a water-
soluble coalescent in a mixture of latex polymer with polyurethane dispersion for the reasons below.
The Examiner argues that “the component which Appellants contend is the ‘water soluble
coalescent’ (Specification, page 5) corresponds to the components which the Floyd reference includes
in Example 7” (Answer, page 5). Example 7 of Floyd does list propylene glycol as an ingredient in the
coating and propylene glycol is disclosed in Appellants’ Specification at page 5 as being a suitable
water-soluble coalescent. However, the latex paints used in Example 7 are those prepared using the
polymers of Examples 1-5 and contain polyester, not polyurethane dispersion. As the formulation of
Example 7 does not contain a polyurethane dispersion, Example 7 teaches neither the claimed
composition nor the claimed method.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007