Appeal No. 2002-2063
Application No. 09/635,093
Furness’ suggested list, regardless of whether they are deemed
auxiliary solvents or not. Furness leaves the relative
proportions up to the skilled artisan. Had the claims recited a
particular concentration of fatty acid methyl ester, this argument
and the previous arguments of the appellants would carry more
weight.
Furness teaches the addition of fatty acid methyl ester
containing a C18 acid. Furness does this for a different purpose,
but there is no evidence that the methyl stearic acid ester does
not also act as a solvent for the polyisocyanate in the final
mixture.
The appellants point to the fact that none of the examples
contain the claimed fatty acid methyl ester. We note that a
reference is not limited to the specific working examples. In re
Chapman, 357 F.2d 418, 424, 148 USPQ 711, 716 (CCPA 1966).
Finally, the appellants urge that the solvent system selected
must have compatibility with its components. We note that Furness
teaches a homogeneous solution of the resin and the phenolic
compound (column 9, lines 61-63) and that the polyisocyanate is
employed in that solution (column 10, lines 35-41). Accordingly,
we disagree and find that Furness contemplates “compatibility” in
the solvents and components.
balance of the solvent (b)(ii) to contain a high boiling aromatic hydrocarbon.
17
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007