We reverse the rejection of claim 18 under 35 U.S.C. ~ 103
as being unpatentable over Bivens in view of Talbot and further
in view Gebauer or Yamamoto, and further in view of Ceska.
II. The Rejection of Claim 6
Claim 6 requires that the second component further
comprises a sugar. This claim is set forth below:
6. A composition according to claim 1 wherein said first
component, second component, or both further comprises a sugar.
In the rejection, the examiner additionally relies upon
Ceska for teaching that sugars serve as accelerators in
combination with a peroxide initiator. (answer, page 4).
For the reasons set forth in Appeal No. 2002-0173 (a copy
which is provided herewith), in connection with the combination
of Bivens in view of Ceska, we reverse the rejection involving
claim 6.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007