Appeal No. 20006-0324
Application No. 10/095,154
Appellants stipulate on page 3 of their brief that all of the appealed claims stand
or fall together for purposes of this appeal. Accordingly, we shall limit our consideration
to claim 1, the sole independent claim, which reads as follows:
1. A thermoplastic molding composition comprising a soft polyurethane
having a Shore A hardness of 70 to 90, and prepared by reacting,
optionally in the presence of (D) a catalyst ,
A) an aliphatic polyisocyanate component comprising
A1) hexamethylene diisocyanate (HDI),
B) a polyol component comprising
B1) 100 to 70 wt.%, based on 100 wt.% of B), of at least
one polyol having a number-average molecular weight
of 3,500 to 6,000 g/mol, selected from the group
consisting of polyoxypropylene glycol,
polyoxyethylene glycol and copolyoxyalkylene diols
comprising polyoxypropylene-polyoxyethylene units,
and
B2) 0 to 30 wt.%, based on 100 wt.% of B), of a different
polyol from B1) having a number-average molecular
weight of 600 to 10,000 g/mol, and
C) a mixture of chain extenders comprising:
C1) 80 to 100 wt.%, based on 100 wt.% of C), of
l,6-hexanediol, and
C2) 0 to 20 wt.%, based on 100 wt.% of C), of a chain
extender having a number-average molecular weight
of 60 to 500 g/mol, and which is different than C1),
wherein the equivalent ratio of NCO groups in A) to OH groups in
B)is 1.5:1.0 to 30.0:1.0, and said polyurethane has an NCO index
of 95 to 105.
The prior art references relied upon by the examiner are:
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007