Appeal No. 2001-0008
Application 09/298,572
in Mizumura et al and Cotting et al in the
curing of the carboxyl groups-containing
acrylic resin of Mizumura et al and the
Japanese patent in order to 1) eliminate
the toxicity endemic to the more commonly
utilized triglycidyl isocyanurate (Cotting
et al, col. 10, lines 36-45) and 2) use a
polyglycidyl compound in solid form without
resorting to complicated and expensive
purification operations to produce a solid
polyglycidyl compound for powder coatings
(Cotting et al, col. 1, lines 36-45).
. . . .
It would have been obvious to conduct
the curing of the powder coatings of
Mizumura et al and the Japanese patent at a
temperature of as low as 100EC as per
Cotting et al in order to reduce the energy
expenditure required of a higher curing
temperature.
(Examiner’s Answer, page 5.)
Where an obviousness determination is based on a
combination of prior art references, there must be some
“teaching, suggestion or incentive supporting the
combination.” In re Geiger, 815 F.2d 686, 688, 2 USPQ2d 1276,
1278 (Fed. Cir. 1987). The motivation for one of ordinary
skill in the art to have combined the references need not be
the same as that of the inventor. See In re Dillon, 919 F.2d
688, 693, 16 USPQ2d 1897, 1901 (Fed. Cir. 1990)(en banc) cert.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007