Appeal No. 2006-1587
Application No. 10/020,768
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Helwig ‘879 in view of
Helwig ‘001
Claim 12 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
obvious over Helwig ‘879 in view of Helwig ‘001.
According to the Examiner, Helwig ‘879 does not teach the
use of an acrylic, ethylene vinyl acetate or any mixtures
thereof as a secondary binder (Answer, page 13). The Examiner
cites Helwig ‘001 as “directed to a wet-laid non-woven mat
suitable for vinyl floor coverings (Abstract)” comprising “a
base mat formed from a mixture of glass fibers, polymeric binder
fibers and/or powder with a treatment of a second water-based
polymeric binder composition” (id.). The Examiner relies on
Helwig ‘001 to teach “the use of a secondary binder such as a
vinyl acetate ethylene copolymer” in a wet-laid non-woven mat
Comment [s9]: Added the period to
(id.). The Examiner concludes that “[i]t would have been the end of sentence.
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
invention was made to use vinyl acetate ethylene copolymer as
suggested by Helwig ‘001 as the secondary binder of Helwig ‘879
to create [a] web with additional strength and dimensional
stability during processing and possessing the desired level of
compressive behavior which is crucial in floor covering
applications” (id.).
Appellant repeats the arguments discussed previously
concerning Helwig ‘879. These arguments are unconvincing for
reasons earlier addressed.
Regarding Helwig ‘001, Appellant argues that this reference
“discloses a mat wherein 100% of the reinforcement fibers are
glass fibers” (Brief, page 19). In addition, Appellant argues
-18-
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007