Appeal No. 2005-1574
Application 09/753,428
In similar manner, the limitation of step “E.)” of claim 21 specifies only “slowly cooling
the extruded product to create a synthetic wood-like product having an external foam skin and a
foam core,” and in such a method disclosed in the written description in the specification, after
leaving the extruder, the extruded material travels across a short space, then encounters cooling
roller unit 117 that can be controlled at a range of about 5° to about 30°C, that is, about 41° to
about 86°F, which is well below the PVC softening point of PVC, 80°C, that is, 176°F, as relied
on by appellants, and next encounters roller system 110 that can be controlled at a range of about
25° to about 250°C, that is, about 77° to about 482°F, which range encompasses said softening
point of PVC that is 55°C above the lower end of the range (see above p. 6).
Thus, the extruded material in the methods of Cope can foam to the same or substantially
same extent before reaching a shaper which begins to cool and harden the surface and then the
core thereof at a temperature below the softening point thereof, as does the extruded material in
methods encompassed by claim 21 before reaching at least one roller unit which begins to cool
the surface and then the core at a temperature well below the softening point of PVC.
Therefore, we find little, if any, difference between process steps encompassed by the
method of claim 21 and those taught by Cope at this point in the respective methods of forming
the same type of product from the same type of extruded materials. Indeed, the same or similar
amount of foam generated in the extruded material by the methods at the time of entering a
cooling unit that begins to harden the material from the surface inward would create the same
surface foam skin and the same foam core.
We find that once the extruded material begins to harden, it can still be shaped to form
the final product while it continues to harden, as shown by the disclosure in Cope with respect to
the extruded material passing through the smooth walled shaper, and from the disclosure in the
specification with respect to the material passing through cooling roller units that can have
smooth or patterned rollers. Indeed, in methods encompassed by appealed claim 21, one of
ordinary skill in the art would understand that the extruded material is compressed in the nip of
at least two rollers in roller system 117, which can have additional rollers, and in the nip of each
of the paired rollers of the at least three or more rollers in roller system 110, which can have
additional rollers, as illustrated in specification Fig. 3 and described in the specification (see
above p. 6). Furthermore, contrary to appellants’ arguments, we find that the methods of Cope
- 11 -
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007