Appeal No. 2006-0574
Application No. 09/878,405
claimed “crosslinkable elastomeric material” containing epoxide groups and the active
filler containing hydroxyl groups, respectively (Answer, paragraph bridging pages 3-4).
The examiner further finds that Varughese teaches crosslinking of the rubber
composition in the absence of additional crosslinking agents (Answer, page 4).
The examiner recognizes that the claimed limitation regarding the “effective
degree of crosslinking” is not explicitly taught by Varughese but finds that there is a
reasonable belief that this prior art reference would have possessed this property
(Answer, page 4). The examiner supports this “reason to believe” by finding that the
same materials are used in Varughese as in appellants’ claimed subject matter, and are
processed under the same conditions (id.). The examiner notes that these findings are
“particularly relevant” to claim 62, which is directed to the composition of elastomeric
polymer containing epoxide groups and the active filler containing hydroxyl groups per
se (id.).
The examiner further finds that the only difference between the claimed subject
matter and Varughese is the claimed process for producing tires and particular process
steps directed to molding the rubber composition into tire articles (Answer, page 4).
However, the examiner concludes that these process steps would have been obvious to
one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the teaching in Varughese that the compositions
have utility in “oil-resistant, air-impermeable and highly damping” applications, with the
examiner noting as well that these steps were “conventional” in the tire art (Answer,
paragraph bridging pages 4-5).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007