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,
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007