Appeal No. 2004-2208 Application No. 10/158,988 Example 4 which was produced in accordance with the present invention. We see no merit in the appellants’ position. When a mixture of ethylene diamine and diethylamine was used as a chain extender, Seneker obtained a spinnable solution without any difficulty. Furthermore, the appellants do not identify any evidence (i.e., data) to support the allegation of a palpable difference in terms of polymer solution sensitivity. To the extent that Example 4 and Comparative Example 5 of the present specification are seen as establishing some criticality for the use of zinc octoate on polymer solution sensitivity, we note that the relied upon examples are limited to specific reactants in particular amounts under a limited set of conditions. The appealed claims, by contrast, are significantly broader in scope. Thus, it is our judgment that the showing is insufficient to establish any difference, much less an unexpected difference, between the claimed invention and the relied upon prior art. The appellants urge that Seneker requires a polyol component that includes from 50 to 95% polytetramethylene glycol, whereas the appealed claims require 0 to 90% of the same. (Appeal brief at 8; reply brief filed Jul. 15, 2004, 9Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007