Appeal No. 1997-2330 Page 5
Application No. 08/398,315
The Examiner further points to column 5, lines 29+ of Floyd which discloses that an excessive
amount of the component, i.e., the ethylene glycol or propylene glycol, which corresponds to
Appellants’ water-soluble coalescent, is used in the formation of the polyurethane dispersion. The
Examiner concludes that this excessive amount would meet the present claims because the amount of
coalescent required by the claims is open to trace amounts (Answer, page 5). However, there is no
reasonable basis to believe that one of ordinary skill in the art would have performed the synthesis of
the polyurethane dispersion so that excess glycol would have remained in the end product coating. As
taught by Floyd at column 5, lines 34-37, the ethylene glycol or propylene glycol is used to form a
polyester prepolymer with excess hydroxyl functionality. The reference does not indicate that any
glycol remains after reacting to form the excess hydroxyl groups. This prepolymer is then further
reacted to form a polyester-polyurethane. The teaching of Floyd would seem to indicate that all the
glycol is to be reacted. There is no intention to leave any unreacted. The Examiner has not established
that Floyd teaches or suggests inclusion of an alkylene glycol or any other water-soluble coalescent in
the coating.
Rejection over Werner
In rejecting the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Werner, the Examiner states that the
Werner composition is compositionally the same as the claimed composition (Answer, page 6). The
Appellants, however, point out at page 13 of their appeal brief that Werner does not teach or suggest
compositions including a water-soluble coalescent. In response, the Examiner points to Appellants’
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007