Appeal No. 1997-2344
Application No. 08/273,550
nucleating agent ingredient, whereas the present invention
“can improve crystallization” without high density
polyethylene. See the brief at page 10. However, for the
reasons set forth above, it is our view that the use of a
nucleating package composed solely of a high melt flow
polypropylene and stearamide would have been prima facie
obvious based primarily on the legal proposition set forth in
In re Susi. In any event, assuming the prima facie case of
obviousness is based on the rationale that it would have been
obvious to use a nucleating package consisting of
polypropylene, stearamide, and high density polyethylene
nucleating agents, we cannot subscribe to appellants’ argument
that the claim language “nucleating package consisting
essentially of” necessarily excludes the use of the high
density polyethylene nucleating agent component. In this
regard, the use of the language “consisting essentially of”,
preceding a list of ingredients in a composition claim,
typically means that the invention necessarily includes the
listed ingredients and is open to the unlisted ingredients
that do not materially affect the basic and novel properties
of the invention. Here, appellants have provided no objective
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007