Appeal No. 2006-0369 Παγε 6
Application No. 10/225,395
Here, the examiner urges that the claimed subject matter
including the negative limitation, “a cross-linking agent that
does not contain sulfur” was not described in the originally
filed application in such a way as to convey to one of ordinary
skill in the art that applicants were in possession of the now
claimed subject matter as of the filing date of this application.
In this regard, the examiner is of the view that the original
disclosure of this application “did not express that sulfur was
excluded....” See page 5 of the answer.
Appellants, on the other hand, contend that “the originally-
filed disclosure would have conveyed to one having ordinary skill
in the art that the applicant had possession of the concept of
what is claimed, in that an ordinary person skilled in the art
would have understood that the crosslinking agent could be one
that did not contain sulfur.” See page 5 of the brief.
We agree with appellants. Numbered paragraph 0023 of
appellants’ originally filed application specification recited
that:
Suitable cross-linking agents include those useful
in cross-linking elastomeric polymers, especially those
useful in cross-linking ethylene-propylene-diene
monomer elastomers. Examples include, but are not
limited to, azides, peroxides, sulfur, and sulfur
derivatives. Free radical initiators are preferred as
cross-linking agents. Examples of free radical
initiators include peroxides, hydroperoxides, and non-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007