Appeal No. 2002-0184 -4-
Application No. 09/058,537
Hintzer et al., “Melt Processable Tetrafluoroethylene-Perfluoropropylvinyl Ether
Copolymers (PFA)” Modern Fluoropolymers, Scheirs, ed., John Wiley & Sons, New
YorK, pp. 223-237 (1997) (hereinafter Scheirs).
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 1 through 8 and 16 through 20 stand rejected under 35 U. S. C. § 112,
first paragraph, as containing subject matter which was not described in the specification in
such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventors, at
the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 7 through 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as
being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter
which appellants’ regard as the invention.
Claims 1 through 5, 7 through 8, 15 through 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as obvious
over EP’868 in view of Admissions by Appellant2.
Claims 1 through 5, 7 through 8, and 15 through 17 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable over Nakagawa in view of Admissions by Appellant.
2Although the statement of the rejection fails to identify which sections of the specification are relied
upon as constituting Admissions by the Appellant, it is apparent that the examiner refers to the description
at page 7, lines 1-2. See Answer, page 4.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007