Appeal No. 1998-1909
Application 08/437,489
would have fairly suggested the appellants’ component B to one of
ordinary skill in the art, and 2) either that the disclosures of
co-vulcanization and dynamic crosslinking would have fairly
suggested, to one of ordinary skill in the art, dynamically
crosslinking Cecchin’s copolymer with the other saturated
polymers, or that a co-vulcanized material is the same or
substantially the same as one which has been dynamically
crosslinked.
The examiner argues that it would have been prima facie
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute
Cecchin’s copolymer for Fischer’s polypropylene because the
higher unsaturated content would cause the compression set of the
product to be enhanced (answer, page 5). The portion of Fischer
relied upon by the examiner in support of this argument (col. 7,
lines 25-31), however, says nothing about the effect of
unsaturated content on compression set.
For the above reasons, we conclude that the examiner has not
carried the burden of establishing a prima facie case of
obviousness of the invention recited in any of the appellants’
claims.
-5-5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007