Ex parte GEORGES et al. - Page 2




          Appeal No. 1997-4345                                                        
          Application No. 08/292,670                                                  

               The subject matter on appeal relates to a polymer having               
          terminal end groups derived from stable free radical compounds              
          wherein these end groups are covalently bonded stable free                  
          radical groups.  This appealed subject matter is adequately                 
          illustrated by independent claim 1 which reads as follows:                  
               1. A polymer having groups located at the ends of the                  
          polymer chain which groups are derived from stable free                     
          radical compounds, wherein the polymer is of the formula:                   
                                   SFR - (R) - SFR                                    
          wherein SFR represents a covalently bonded stable free radical              
          group and R represents a polymer chain including a                          
          thermoplastic resin.                                                        
               The references relied upon by the examiner in the                      
          rejections before us are:                                                   
          Tong et al. (Tong)            5,034,485           Jul. 23, 1991             
          Georges et al. (Georges)           5,322,912           Jun. 21,             
          1994                                                                        
               Claims 1 through 9 are rejected under the first and                    
          second paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. § 112 “as the claimed invention              
          is not described in such full, concise and exact terms as to                
          enable any person skilled in the art to make and use the same,              
          and/or for failing to particularly point out and distinctly                 
          claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the                     
          invention” (answer, page 4).                                                

                                          2                                           





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007