Appeal No. 2006-0574
Application No. 09/878,405
range (see the specification, page 16, ll. 20-27, for the definition of the dispersion
index). See In re Best, supra; In re Spada, supra.
For the foregoing reasons and those stated in the Answer, we determine that the
examiner has established a prima facie case of obviousness in view of Varughese.
Appellants, in rebuttal, argue that the only test data of record supports the fact that the
claim limitation regarding the effective degree of crosslinking is not inherent (Brief, page
19; Reply Brief, page 4). Accordingly, we begin anew and consider the evidence for
and against obviousness. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443,
1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
Appellants argue that, according to Figure 1 of Varughese, the torque increase
for Mix D after 1 hour of heating at 180°C. is about 5 dN•m while appellants’ Example 5
shows a near 15 dN•m increase after only 30 minutes at 170°C (Brief, page 19).
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007