Appeal No. 2005-1332 Page 2
Application No. 09/774,064
INTRODUCTION
Claims 1 and 3 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by or, in the
alternative, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over Japanese Published Unexamined
Application 05-170,802 to Hoshino et al. published on July 9, 1993 (Hoshino).1
The claims stand or fall together (Brief, p. 4). We select claim 1 to represent the issues
on appeal. Claim 1 reads as follows:
1. A waterborne pigmented paper or paperboard coating composition
comprising pigment comprising 50% to 100%, by weight of said pigment,
calcium carbonate and from 1% to 25%, as dry weight by weight of said
pigment, of an aqueous polymeric dispersion comprising
(c) 95-25% by weight, based on the weight of the solids of said aqueous
polymeric dispersion, of a first emulsion polymer having an average
particle diameter of 150 to 3000 nanometers and
(d) 5-75% by weight, based on the weight of the solids of said aqueous
polymeric dispersion, of a second emulsion polymer having an
average particle diameter of 40 to 600 nanometers
wherein the ratio of said average particle diameter of said first
emulsion polymer to said average particle diameter of said second
emulsion polymer is from 1.2 to 60,
wherein at least said first emulsion polymer particles, when dry, contain at
least one void, and wherein said first emulsion polymer is prepared in the
presence of said second emulsion polymer or said second emulsion polymer is
prepared in the presence of said first emulsion polymer.
Because the Examiner has established a prima facie case of obviousness, we affirm. Our
reasons follow.
1We rely upon and cite to the English translation made of record on March 14, 2005.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007