Appeal No. 2001-0772
Application No. 09/052,429
(iv) mixing the carbon black and the molten elastomer in the mixing zone;
(v) optionally, pelletizing the mixture of carbon black and elastomer;
(vi) recycling the mixture of carbon black and elastomer from step (iv) or the pellets from
step (v) to a melt/mixer;
(vii) introducing additional particulate semiconductive carbon black into the melt/mixer in
an amount sufficient to provide a total amount of carbon black in the range of about
25 to about 50 percent by weight based on the weight of the resin;
(viii) melting and mixing the mixture from step (vii); and
(ix) pelletizing or extruding the mixture from step (viii).
The references relied upon by the examiner are:
Alia 4,197,381 Apr. 8, 1980
Kotani et al. (Kotani) 4,598,127 Jul. 1, 1986
Unger 5,369,149 Nov. 29, 1994
"Rubber Technology, 3rd Edition," Morton, M. Ed., Van Nostrand Reinhold 1987, pp. 28-29
(Rubber Technology).
The following rejections are at issue in this appeal:1
(1) Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over the combined
teachings of Unger, Rubber Technology and Kotani.
1The rejection of claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second and fourth paragraphs, has been
withdrawn by the examiner. See Answer, p. 2. Furthermore, an objection to the Abstract is
outstanding. However, as pointed out by the examiner, the objection to the Abstract is not
appealable, but rather is a petitionable matter under 37 CFR § 1.181. See MPEP §§ 1002 and
1201 (8th ed., Aug. 2001); In re Mindick, 371 F.2d 892, 894, 152 USPQ 566, 568 (CCPA 1967).
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007