Appeal No. 1998-0870
Application No. 08/325,015
appellants’ problem of providing an antistatic, electrically
conductive coating. Similarly, Wessling relates to antistatic
or electrically conductive polymer compositions (abstract),
and thus appellants would have been motivated to consider its
teachings in addressing the need for an antistatic,
electrically conductive coating on a display screen.
Appellants urge that even if Kinoshita and Wessling are
combined, the finely divided non-conductive material and the
non-conductive polymer matrix in Wessling would provide a
coating that, unlike the claimed coating, would not
“predominantly consist of” latex particles of polypyrrole and
antimony doped tin oxide particles. We do not subscribe to
this argument. First, as we discussed above, Wessling is
cited to show that carbon black and polypyrrole have
comparable electroconductive properties, thus making them
interchangeable for the purposes disclosed in Kinoshita.
Again, we are not persuaded by appellants’ attack of the
references individually. Further, as we pointed out above,
the phrase “predominately consists of” is much broader in
scope than “consists of.” In this regard, the finely divided
non-conductive material (component C) of Wessling is optional
20
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007