Appeal No. 1999-2201
Application No. 08/704,063
catalyzed cure reaction with SiH functional polymers.” See col.
3, ll. 39-43.
For the foregoing reasons and those stated in the Answer, we
determine that the examiner has established a prima facie case of
obviousness for the subject matter of the claims on appeal in
view of the reference evidence.
B. The Rejection over Keryk, JP ‘786 and Lee
As discussed above, the examiner finds that Keryk teaches
the advantages of higher alkenyl substituents in the
polyorganosiloxane polymer used as component (A). In this
rejection, the examiner also finds that Keryk discloses
components (B) and (C) as recited in claim 35 on appeal (Answer,
page 5). The examiner further finds that Keryk discloses
hydrosilylation inhibitors as component (D), with the general
teaching that one class of these inhibitors is the reaction
product of a siloxane having silicon-bonded hydrogen atoms, a
platinum catalyst, and an acetylenic alcohol (id., citing col. 6,
ll. 35-37). Accordingly, the examiner applies JP ‘786 and Lee
for the showing of known silylated acetylenic hydrosilylation
inhibitors with their attendant advantages (see the Answer, page
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007