Appeal No. 2002-1190
Application No. 09/023,470
The examiner does not rely upon prior art in the rejection
of the appealed claims.
Appellants' claimed invention is directed to a method for
stabilizing and whitening a melt-fabricable fluoropolymer resin
having no more than 0.3% of total unstable fraction. The method
entails incorporating an alkali metal nitrate in the resin before
it is extruded, with the proviso that the resin is "free of boron
nitride" (claim 1).
Appealed claims 1 and 4-11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph, description requirement.1
Appellants submit at page 4 of the Brief that "[c]laims 1
and 4-11 stand of [sic, or] fall together with respect to issues
1 and 2" (second paragraph). Since appellants' issue 1 concerns
the § 112, first paragraph rejection, all the appealed claims
stand or fall together with claim 1.
We have thoroughly reviewed each of appellants' arguments
for patentability. However, we are in complete agreement with
the examiner that appellants' specification, as originally filed,
does not provide descriptive support for the claimed subject
matter within the meaning of § 112, first paragraph.
Accordingly, we will sustain the examiner's rejection.
1 The examiner has withdrawn the rejections based on prior
art (see page 3 of Answer).
-2-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007