Appeal No. 1999-2507
Application No. 08/967,367
1990)(en banc). Here, the appellants have not pointed to any
objective evidence (e.g., comparative experimental data)
establishing otherwise.
The appellants urge that "in the case of graft product A,
the particulate rubber must be a silicone rather than a
polymerized unsaturated compound ." On this point, we agree with
the examiner's analysis. (Examiner's answer, page 10.)
For these reasons and those set forth in the answer, we
uphold this ground of rejection as well.
Summary
In summary, we affirm the examiner's rejections under 35
U.S.C. § 103 of appealed claims 9 through 14 and 16 through 23 as
unpatentable over: (1) Brekner and/or Yamamoto in view of
Laughner; and (2) Eichenauer.
The decision of the examiner to reject appealed claims 9
through 14 and 16 through 23 is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
BRADLEY R. GARRIS )
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007