The opinion in support of the decision being entered today
was not written for publication and is not binding precedent of
the Board.
Paper No. 27
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
Ex parte ANDREAS KAPLAN,
MANFRED HOPPE and EBERHARD KINKELIN
______________
Appeal No. 1998-2000
Application 08/469,171
_______________
HEARD: March 20, 2001
_______________
Before JOHN D. SMITH, WARREN and OWENS, Administrative Patent Judges.
WARREN, Administrative Patent Judge.
Decision on Appeal and Opinion
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the decision of the examiner finally rejecting
claims 1, 2, 7 through 9, 11 through 14 and 17 through 21, and refusing to allow claim 22 as amended
subsequent to the final rejection.1,2
1 See the amendments of June 6, 1995 (Paper No. 5), April 9, 1996 (Paper No. 6½), October 13,
1995 (Paper No. 7), April 9, 1996 (Paper No. 10), November 4, 1996 (Paper No. 13), and August
13, 1997 (Paper No. 17).
2 We observe that while claim 1 specifies ß-hydroxy alkyl amide as the only cross-linking agent for the
binder resin, claim 12 states “[i]n a process. . . mixing the binder resin, the at least one cross-linking
agent from the group of polyfunctional epoxy compounds and ß-hydroxy alkyl amides . . . each in
- 1 -
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007