Appeal No. 2006-3248 Page 9
Application No. 10/617,585
process, not as a crosslinking component which is recited in claim 1. Barkac, column
12, lines 18-30. Consequently, we do not find the epoxy to correspond to any element
in claim 1.
Because the failure to meet the “crosslinking component” of claim 1 is sufficient
to reverse the rejection, we do not have to address whether the copolymer component
described in Barkac meets the requirements of the claimed copolymer.
For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the Examiner has failed to provide
adequate evidence to establish prima facie anticipation of the claimed subject matter.
The rejection of claims 1-16, 18-21, and 26 is reversed.
REVERSED
Donald E. Adams )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
Lora M. Green )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
Richard M. Lebovitz )
Administrative Patent Judge )
RL/dm
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007