Appeal No. 2006-3155
Application 09/682,749
obviousness, and, if so, does Appellants’ comparison testing provide
persuasive evidence of unexpected results?
FINDINGS OF FACT
1) MacGregor discloses a multilayer plastic article comprising a
thermoplastic substrate and at least one layer of a cycloaliphatic
polyester. Col. 1, ll. 54-58. MacGregor teaches that a layer of the same
cycloaliphatic polyester may be laminated or adhered to both sides of the
substrate. Col. 1, ll. 38-43.
2) MacGregor also discloses a multilayer article comprising a
substrate, an intermediate film of the same material as the substrate and a
top layer of a cycloaliphatic polyester, such as PCCD. Claim 23; col. 10,
ll. 44-48.
3) MacGregor’s substrate may be a polycarbonate, polyester or blend
thereof. Col. 1, ll. 31-37. The polyester used in the substrate may be a
cycloaliphatic polyester. Col. 8, ll. 48-50; Claim 8.
4) MacGregor discloses that a preferred cycloaliphatic polyester is
poly(1,4-cyclohexane-dimethanol-1,4-cyclohexanedicarboxylate)
(PCCD), but there is no explicit teaching that this preference is directed
to the intermediate layer. Col. 4, ll. 46-59.
5) According to MacGregor, suitable cycloaliphatic polyesters are
those characterized by optical transparency and improved weatherability
compared to the substrate alone. Col. 2, ll. 62-65.
6) MacGregor found that “[c]ycloaliphatic polyester resins . . . have
better weatherability than polycarbonate alone.” Col. 6, ll. 20-21.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013