Appeal No. 2001-0742
Application 09/128,912
monomer and mixtures thereof in ranges overlapping those recited
in claim 8. However, none of these references teach a specific
example wherein the latex composition comprises the components in
proportions which fall within the claimed ranges.
As conceded by the examiner, none of the cited
references disclose crosslinked films having all of the recited
features of “a tensile strength of at least about 1000 psi, an
elongation of at least 400 percent, and a modulus at 100 percent
elongation of no more than about 500 psi” (claim 8). See
Examiner’s Answer, page 4 (“Schwinum . . . does not specifically
disclose Applicant’s [sic] recited elongation, modulus and swell
area values.”); page 5 (“Kolb may not specifically disclose
Applicant’s [sic] recited modulus and swell area.”); page 6
(“Bruschtein may not specifically disclose Applicant’s [sic]
recited modulus, elongation and swell area.”); and page 7
(“Buchheim does not specifically disclose Applicant’s [sic]
recited elongation, modulus and swell area.”). It is the
examiner’s position that because the cited references disclose
the same rubber latex compositions, then the crosslinked films
must inherently possess the same physical properties of
appellants’ claimed crosslinked films. See id.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007