Appeal No. 2006-0894 Page 10
Application No. 10/412,840
regard, we note that the information conveyed by the disclosure
of using Mylar as a substrate in Erickson includes that which
would be intrinsically conveyed thereby, including the moisture
holding properties of Mylar. 3
Here, appellants have not argued, much less offered any
evidence to establish, that Mylar does not intrinsically possess
a low moisture content within any of those claimed ranges. As
such, we shall also affirm the examiner’s anticipation rejection
of each of separately argued dependent claims 4, 5 and 18.
Claims 13, 6, 17, 22, 23 and 24
We select claim 13 as representative of this claim grouping.
Concerning this claim grouping and representative claim 13, we
note that appellants maintain that Erickson does not disclose the
less than about 5 percent moisture content substrate and the
maintaining thereof during the curing of the adhesive limitations
of representative claim 13. However, as discussed above,
Erickson discloses the use of a Mylar substrate, which substrate
would intrinsically possess low moisture characteristics,
including possessing a moisture content as low as here claimed
whether before or during the curing step. This is an intrinsic
3See footnote 1 and Table 7 of Kirk-Othmer under the
caption Moisture absorption across from “polyester (Mylar).
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007