Appeal No. 2001-0106
Application 08/855,811
an electrically conductive stripe which is a layer of metal (column 2, lines 54-55) having
a conductive adhesive on the stripe (column 2, lines 40-41). The bonds having the best
durability are obtained when the adhesive has “an interacted functionally reactive
organosilane coupling agent” (column 4, lines 48-49) contained in the adhesive. While
this is not a clear teaching of the layers of claims 1 and 8, it in our view further renders
the results obtained by the Appellants not unexpected, and we will sustain the
Examiner’s rejection of claims 1 and 8 under §103 over Bruder in view of Thomson
(Rejection E).
Rejection (I)
[The rejection is] repeated, with the addition of Hahn et al as a secondary
reference … . Note that these patentees clearly disclose (N.B. column 1, lines
32-46) that organosilane compounds (i.e. coupling agents) are appreciated by
this art to/by definition form a bond between an inorganic substrate and a
polymer layer by interacting/reacting/coupling with both substrate and polymer.
This reference is specifically applied primarily for the sake of exposition and
completeness (Examiner’s Answer, page 7, lines 1-8)(Emphasis in Original).
For the same reasons as noted above for Rejection (E), and as Hahn is
cumulative to Thomson, we sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1 and 8 under
§103 over Bruder in view of Thomson further in view of Hahn (Rejection I).
Rejection (F)
Claim 6 stands further rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over
the teachings of the U.S. Patents to Bruder in view of either Pleuddemann or Hahn et al.
The Examiner states that “it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in
this art to employ the silane compound/coupling agent of either Pleuddemann or Hahn
et al for their documented beneficial coupling and/or adhesion promoting function in/in
18
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007