Appeal No. 2001-1140
Application No. 08/867,771
particularly no teaching in the Lacourse of adding water in a selectively
controlled manner in dependence on the degree of foaming of the extrudate.
(Rehearing request, pp.1-2).
Appellants’ request is clearly unpersuasive of patentability for the reasons detailed in
our decision on pages 5 and 6. Lacourse discloses the expansion of the foam cell structure is
dependent on the total moisture content. (Col. 5, ll. 29 to 33). Lacourse discloses that water
may be added to the extruder so that the product has a total moisture content of preferably 13
to 19%. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art performing the process of Lacourse by
adding water to the extruder to adjust the moisture content between 13 to 19% would have
also been adjusting the foam cell structure. Claim 34 does not require water to be added “on
the fly” as now argued by Appellants.
We have reconsidered our decision in light of all of the arguments made in the
Appellant’s request. However, we see no compelling reason justifying a different result.
Accordingly, we decline to modify our original decision.
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007