Appeal No. 2006-1761
Application No. 10/153,074
material may be a silicone, but this reference fails to teach the
specific elastomeric sealant material specified in claim 1 on
appeal (i.e., component (A), component (B), catalyst (IV), and
additive (III))(Answer, pages 3-4).
The examiner finds that Kovar teaches a silicone elastomeric
sealing material within the scope of claim 1 on appeal (Answer,
page 4). From these findings, the examiner concludes that it
would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at
the time of appellants’ invention to apply the curable,
elastomeric sealant taught by Kovar to seal the fuel cell
components of Koschany for the advantages taught by Kovar
(Answer, pages 4-5).
Appellants do not dispute the examiner’s factual findings
from either Koschany or Kovar (Reply Brief, page 2). Rather,
appellants argue that it was known in the art that silicones were
useful as sealants in fuel cells but their use was found
unsatisfactory (Brief, pages 7-8). Appellants also argue that
while Kovar teaches that his silicone elastomer is useful as a
sealant in general, there is no teaching or disclosure that his
compositions would have been suitable for fuel cells (Brief, page
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007