Appeal No. 2006-2484 Παγε 2
Application No. 10/837,337
1. A preformed composition in shaped-form comprising:
a base composition comprising at least one sulfur-
containing polymer, and at least one electrically conductive
filler; and
a curing agent composition;
wherein the preformed composition is capable of
shielding EMI/RFI radiation.
28. The preformed composition of Claim 1, wherein the
sulfur-containing polymer has a number average molecular
weight ranging from 500 to 8,000 grams per mole.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Smith et al. (Smith) 3,659,896 May 02, 1972
DeMoss et al. (DeMoss) 6,372,849 Apr. 16, 2002
Claims 1-29 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over DeMoss or Smith.1
1 Claims 28 and 29 were omitted from the statement of rejection
set forth in the final office action. Appellants make note of that
omission at page 2 of the brief. The examiner includes claims 28 and
29 in the statement of rejection set forth in the answer. Appellants
have not asserted that a new ground of rejection is involved in the
answer by filing a timely petition. Rather, appellants have indicated
that all of claims 1-29 were rejected and are appealed, as noted at
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007