Appeal No. 2003-1795
Application No. 09/821,702
REJECTION
Claims 1 through 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Erickson, Masse and Coolbaugh in view of
Handlin and Richards.
We affirm.
This is appellants’ third appeal of the subject matter
involving a “crosslinkable” composition. The previously appealed
subject matter is identical to the subject matter of present
claim 1, except for a minor semantic difference, i.e., the phrase
“a diene monomer which yields substituted aliphatic double bonds
that are epoxidized” is used in lieu of “a diene monomer which
yields unsaturation suitable for expoxidation” in the previously
appealed claim 1. Compare present claim 1 with claim 1 in our
previous decisions involving Appeal Nos. 1997-2238 and 1997-
4371.1 The previous merits panel concluded that it would have
been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to arrive at the
previously appealed subject matter relying predominantly on
1 See also claim 1 of our decision involving Appeal No.
96-3269 which relates to a curable (cross-linkable) composition
containing, inter alia, a monohydroxylated epoxidzed polydiene
polymer and a curing agent which generically includes an amino
resin.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007