Ex parte EDWARDS et al. - Page 5

          Appeal No. 1997-3906                                                        
          Application No. 08/233,482                                                  

          obviousness conclusion.  Certainly, Edwards contains no                     
          disclosure which would have suggested replacing his                         
          polypropylene based composition with a composition comprising               
          a polyethylene component having the melt index and molecular                
          weight distribution required by the independent claims on                   
          appeal.  As previously indicated, the only polyethylene                     
          component disclosed by Edwards is unquestionably different                  
          from the appellants’ claimed polyethylene component.  Further,              
          the examiner points to nothing specific and we find nothing                 
          independently in the Canadian patent or Uno which would have                
          suggested modifying Edwards’ process so as to result in use of              
          a composition comprising the polyethylene component under                   
          consideration for extrusion coating at a temperature in the                 
          range of 175E up to 290EC as required by the appealed claims.               
               Under the foregoing circumstances, we cannot sustain the               
          examiner’s section 103 rejection of the appealed claims as                  
          being unpatentable over Edwards alone or taken with the                     
          Canadian patent and Uno.                                                    


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007