Appeal 2006-0990
Application 10/209,369
disclosed in column 3, lines 8-49. The component column identifies the
claimed component and in parentheses, where necessary, the component of
Warzelhan meeting the claimed component is identified.
Component Claim 1 Warzelhan (mol%)
(mol%) Broad Preferred More Preferred
Aromatic dicarboxylic acid 80-20 80-5 70-20 60-30
(terephthalic acid or ester-
forming derivatives)
Aliphatic dicarboxylic acid20-80 20-95 30-80 40-70
(adipic acid or ester-forming
derivatives)
Sulfonate 1 0.1-10 0-5 0-3 0.1-2
First glycol 99.9-91.0 99.8-15 99.5-60 99.5-70
(dihydroxy with ether
functionality - pref. ethylene
glycol; 1,4-butanediol)
Poly(alkylene ether) glycol0.1-4.0 0.2-85 0.5-40 0.5-30
As is clear from the table, the preferred concentrations of the
dicarboxylic acids of Warzelhan are fairly similar to those claimed,
however, the concentrations of the other components vary appreciably from
those claimed. Moreover, further selection of the first glycol (ethylene
glycol or 1,4-butanediol) is required from a broader subset of dihydroxy
1 Mole percentages in claim 1 for the aromatic and aliphatic dicarboxylic
acids are based on the total moles of the dicarboxylic acids not including the
sulfonate. Warzelhan includes the sulfonates as part of the total moles of
dicarboxylic acids. However, the concentration of sulfonate is so low that
whether it is calculated based on the total dicarboxylic acids or is calculated
based on the total polymer composition, the percentage amount does not
significantly change such that it is outside the claimed range. Moreover,
Appellant makes no argument with regard to this difference.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013