Appeal No. 2003-0029
Application No. 09/385,933
stretching the resulting annealed film precursor to form said
microporous membrane.
As evidence of unpatentability, the Examiner relies on the following
references:
Yu et al. (Yu ‘281) 5,565,281 Oct. 15, 1996
Best et al. (Best) 5,635,262 Sept. 16, 1997
Yu et al. (Yu ‘911) 5,667,911 Jun. 03, 1997
The Examiner rejected claims 1 to 10 and 12 to 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
over the combination of Yu ‘281 and Best; and claims 7, 8, 11 and 14 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) over the combination of Yu ‘911 and Best. (Answer, pp. 3-8).
We have thoroughly reviewed each of the Examiner’s reasons for the rejection
of the claimed subject matter. However, we are in complete agreement with the
Appellants that the claimed subject matter would not have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art within the meaning of § 103 in view of the applied prior art.
Accordingly, we will not uphold the Examiner’s rejections.
Best discloses the process for forming a nonporous film by extrusion and blow
molding wherein the blow-up ratio exceeds 1.5. (Col. 2, 22 to 33 and the Examples).
The film preferably comprises 90 to 99 percent polyethylene. (Col. 3, ll. 29 to 33).
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007