Appeal No. 2001-2470 Page 5
Application No. 08/890,134
Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Furthermore, even with appellants’ interpretation of the
reference, the claimed upper limit of the weight ratio (3.5:1)
would have been so near the disclosed value of 4:1 by Puletti
that one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected these
values to produce similar properties, and thus the claimed ratio
would have been prima facie obvious in view of Puletti. See
Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 781,
227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
However, we cannot agree with appellants’ narrow
interpretation of the reference. The weight ratio of 4:1 for
midblock compatible resin to oil is only taught in the Examples
of Puletti (see Tables 1-3 on cols. 9-10, where Escorez 5320 is
the hydrocarbon resin or midblock compatible resin and the
mineral oil is the oil component). As correctly stated by the
examiner, the disclosure of Puletti is not limited by the
examples (Answer, page 5). See In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747,
750, 192 USPQ 278, 280 (CCPA 1976); and In re Widmer, 353 F.2d
752, 757, 147 USPQ 518, 523 (CCPA 1965). A reference is
available for all that it discloses and suggests to one of
ordinary skill in the art, and the examples are merely that,
exemplary of what the reference discloses. Puletti generically
discloses amounts of the midblock compatible resin, the oil, and
the elastomeric copolymer which encompass the claimed weight
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007