Ex Parte EGITTO et al - Page 23


              Appeal No. 2001-0106                                                                                     
              Application 08/855,811                                                                                   
              “Leclanche cells” is outlined.  Terminal current collectors are formed by laminating                     
              tinned steel or aluminum foil to a conductive plastic substrate.  The statement at column                
              2, lines 13-17, is especially telling.  “While it has been suggested that these metals can               
              be laminated directly to the conductive plastic substrate, in practice this is not practical             
              without the use of an intermediate conductive plastic adhesive.”                                         
                     As noted above, this disclosure unambiguously teaches the metal substrate, a                      
              conductive adhesive, and a conductive adherend as required by claim 6.  It does not,                     
              however, teach the layer of coupling agent recited in claim 6.  The Examiner turns to the                
              Pleuddemann and Hahn references to establish the obviousness of this modification.                       
                     Pleuddemann discloses using the claimed organosilane coupling agents (column                      
              1, line 25 et seq.) on inorganic substrates (including metals) (column 2, lines 58-66) and               
              epoxy resins (column 3, lines 18-19).  Hahn discloses an organosilane coupling agent                     
              (column 1, lines 32-48) for bonding inorganic surfaces including metal (column 6, line                   
              41-46) with polymers (column 2, lines 32-34).                                                            
                     Again, the Examiner has remained unpersuaded by the resistivity stability results                 
              put forth by the Appellants.  For the reasons previously recited, we find no error in the                
              Examiner’s maintaining this rejection, and affirm Rejection D.                                           
                                             NEW GROUNDS OF REJECTION                                                  
                     We enter new grounds of rejection under the provisions of 37 C.F.R. § 1.196(b).                   
                     Rejection J                                                                                       
                     Claims 1, 3, 6, 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 (a) as being                           
              unpatentable over the teachings of U.S. Patent  4,569,877 to Tollefson and U.S. Patent                   
              4,568,602 to Stow individually.                                                                          


                                                          23                                                           



Page:  Previous  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007