Appeal No. 2001-0676
Application No. 08/941,132
and Kondo would have led one of ordinary skill in the art to
deproteinize and graft-copolymerize natural rubber, motivated by a
reasonable expectation of obtaining a rubber material having
significantly improved physical properties. The appellants,
however, are correct in asserting that the combined teachings of
Yasuyuki and Kondo do not teach or suggest epoxidizing the
deproteinized natural rubber.
The examiner relies on either Burlett or Hayashi to show that
epoxidizing synthetic and/or natural rubber to enhance their
physical properties is well known. See Answer, page 4. The
appellants also acknowledge that epoxidizing natural rubber to
impart excellent physical properties is known. See the
specification, page 2.
Given the improvement in physical properties imparted by
deproteinizing natural rubber (which is superior to synthetic
rubber in green strength) and epoxidizing protein free (synthetic
rubber) and protein present (natural rubber) rubbers, we concur
with the examiner that the combined teachings of Yasuyuki and
either Burlett or Hayashi would have led one of ordinary skill in
the art to deproteinize and epoxidize natural rubber, motivated by
a reasonable expectation of successfully obtaining a rubber
material having significantly improved physical properties. The
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007