Appeal No. 2005-0960
Application No. 10/053,166
nothing in the examiner’s rejection or in the disclosure of Fujii
which indicates that the combination of peroxide and Zn oxide (as
taught by Hert) is not effective.
Rather, the express teaching of Fujii relates to a
preference for the combination of peroxide and crosslinking aids
which include liquid acrylates of the type here claimed (e.g.,
trimethylolpropane trimethacrylate and ethylene glycol
dimethacrylate; see lines 28-32 on specification page 3). More
specifically, Fujii teaches that, “[w]hen an organic peroxide
type crosslinking agent is used as a crosslinking agent, it is
preferred to use in combination a crosslinking aid such as . . .
trimethylolpropane trimethacrylate [and] ethylene glycol
dimethacrylate” (sentence bridging pages 9-10; emphasis added).
For the reasons fully articulated by the examiner, this explicit
teaching of a preference by Fujii would have motivated an artisan
to replace the peroxide and zinc oxide combination of Hert’s
example 4 with the preferred combination of peroxide and, for
example, trimethylolpropane trimethacrylate preferred by Fujii.
In light of the foregoing, it is our ultimate determination
that the examiner has established a prima facie case of
obviousness which the appellant has failed to successfully rebut
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007