Appeal No. 2003-0878
Application No. 09/575,903
polysiloxane block, the process comprising the steps
of:
(a) forming a polysiloxane macroinitiator by a
nucleophilic substitution reaction between (i) a
polysiloxane which is end capped with at least one
group capable of nucleophilic attack via its O, N, or
S atom and (ii) a radical initiator comprising at
least one –C(O)X group, in which X is a leaving group
capable of substitution by the nucleophilic O, N or S
atom of polysiloxane (i)[1] and at least one organic
halide group capable of generating a radical in the
presence of a transition metal catalyst; followed by:
(b) reacting the organic halide groups of the
polysiloxane macroinitiator so obtained with radically
polymerizable monomers in the presence of a catalytic
amount of a Cu(I) salt or other transitional metal
species to form a polysiloxane block copolymer.
3. A polysiloxane block copolymer obtainable by
the process of claim 1.
5. A cosmetic and personal care composition
comprising the polysiloxane block copolymer of claim
3.
The examiner relies upon the following references as
evidence of unpatentability:
Kumar et al. (Kumar) EP 0 413 550 A2 Feb. 20, 1991
Tsubakihara et al. (Tsubakihara) 5,840,291 Nov. 24, 1998
Matyjaszewsi et al.(Matyjaszewski) WO 98/01480 Jan. 15, 1998
Claims 1, 3, and 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentability over Kumar in view of Matyjaszewski.
1 We notice the use of “(i)”, for a second time, in this claim. We are uncertain whether the use of “(i)” for a
second time in this claim is correct and was intended. Upon further prosecution we encourage both the examiner
and appellants to work together to clarify this issue.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007