Appeal No. 2006-0574
Application No. 09/878,405
the claimed “elastomeric polymer containing epoxide groups” and the “active filler
containing hydroxyl groups” (Varughese, Table II, page 1848). Appellants exemplify
compositions of ENR 50 (50 mol % epoxidized natural rubber)(Table 2, page 26 of the
specification) and VN3 silica (page 15, l. 26), while Varughese also exemplifies ENR-50
and Ultrasil VN3 (page 1848, Tables 1 and 2).
With regard to the rejection of claims 93, 102 and 103, appellants argue that
there is no teaching in Varughese regarding the claimed “degree of dispersion” (Brief,
pages 24-25; Reply Brief, pages 11-12). This argument is not persuasive for reasons
stated above. Although this characteristic or property is not explicitly disclosed by
Varughese, there is reasonable belief that this property is inherently possessed by the
mixture of the reference. See In re Best, supra; In re Spada, supra. Varughese
teaches mixing of the ENR-50 and silica in a two-roll mixing mill, with care taken to
ensure that the mill-roll temperature does not exceed the set temperature to avoid any
crosslinking during mixing (paragraph bridging pages 1847-48). Appellants teach that
mixing of the ENR and silica can occur “according to techniques known in the art,”
including an open-mill mixer (specification, page 18, ll. 21-29). Appellants further teach
that during the mixing the temperature is kept “below a predetermined value so as to
avoid premature cross-linking of the composition” (specification, page 19, ll. 1-3).
Accordingly, since the mixing is done by the same or conventional methods under the
same conditions, we determine that there is a reasonable belief that the degree of
dispersion for the Varughese composition would be the same or similar as the claimed
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007