Appeal No. 2003-0941
Application No. 09/797,296
volatile in nature. Answer, page 3. Appellants do not dispute
this finding of fact.
The examiner states that Traver teaches that improved film
forming properties are imparted to the emulsions if the cyclic
polysiloxanes are stripped from the emulsion prepared by the
above process, and suggests stripping of the emulsion to remove
the cyclic polysiloxanes. Answer, pages 3-4.
The examiner states that Traver differs from appellants’
claims in the manner in which the cyclic polysiloxanes are
removed from the emulsion. The examiner states that Traver
teaches stripping of the cyclic polysiloxanes, rather than
removing them by pervaporation as claimed. Answer, page 4.
The examiner relies upon McGlothlin for teaching selective
removal of hydrocarbons from aqueous emulsions using
pervaporation membranes. The examiner states that McGlothlin
teaches that pervaporation membrane technique is applicable for
removing solvents from a variety of elastomeric polymers
prepared by solution polymerization. The examiner states that
McGlothlin teaches that conventional methods of removing
solvents, i.e., gas stripping or steam stripping, have
drawbacks. The examiner states that McGlothlin suggests a
variety of membranes for the process, including the same kinds
of membranes used by appellants, and therefore, the membranes
taught by McGlothlin are hydrophobic in nature. Answer, page 4.
The examiner also states that McGlothlin teaches a variety
of polymerized emulsions, including silicones, from which the
solvents can be removed by pervaporation membrane (col. 8, lines
35-68). The examiner states that McGlothlin suggests removing a
variety of solvents such as aliphatic, saturated, unsaturated
and cyclic, including volatile hydrocarbons (col. 9, lines 1-
10). Answer, page 4.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007