Appeal No. 2002-1001
Application No. 09/202,906
N.I. Nikitin, The Chemistry of Cellulose and Wood 62-71 (J.
Schmorak trans., Israel Program for Scientific Translations,
Ltd. 1966).
Leo Mandelkern, An Introduction to Macromolecules 18-27
(Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 2d. ed. 1983).
Paul C. Hiemenz, Polymer Chemistry: The Basic Concepts 34-43
(Marcel-Dekker, Inc. 1984).
Joel R. Fried, Polymer Science and Technology 16-18 (Prentice
Hall PTR 1995).
The appellants rely on the following reference in support
of their arguments:
Aldrich Handbook of Fine Chemicals and Laboratory Equipment F12,
786 (n.d.)(Aldrich).
Claim 3 on appeal stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph, as indefinite. (Answer, pages 3-8.)
We affirm.
The appellants do not dispute the examiner’s finding, based
on substantial evidence in the form of the relied upon prior
art, that the weight average molecular weight (Mw) value and the
number average molecular weight (Mn) value for the here claimed
polymer differ significantly. Nor do they contest the
examiner’s determination that molecular weight values would be
meaningless to one skilled in the relevant art and would thus
render a claim reciting them indefinite, unless the particular
type of molecular weight characterization (i.e., weight average
Mw or number average Mn) is sufficiently indicated in the claim
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007