Appeal 2006-3373
Application 09/919,504
of the preparation of these block copolymers [i.e., the linear
copolymers HO(C2H4O)b(C3H6O)a(C2H4O)bH] is found in U.S.
Patent No. 2,674,619 [Lundsted]. (Also see, “A Review of
Block Polymer Surfactants”, Schmolka I.R., J. Am. Oil Chemist
Soc., 54:110-116 (1977) and Block and Graft
Copolymerization, Volume 2, edited by R.J. Ceresa, John Wiley
and Sons, New York, 1976[), sic].
Thus, even assuming for the sake of argument that Lundsted and
Schmolka were properly incorporated by reference, the disclosure of the
’271 Application does not provide written description support of the
invention as is now claimed. One skilled in the art reading the above
excerpts would only look to Lundsted and Schmolka for their teaching of
methods of synthesizing the linear copolymers of formula
HO(C2H4O)b(C3H6O)a(C2H4O)bH, the only block copolymers discussed in
the ’271 Application. One skilled in the art, reading the above excerpts,
would not readily discern that octablock coplymers as claimed in the claims
on appeal were part of the invention disclosed in the ’271 Application. The
Specification of the ’271 Application is drawn solely to linear copolymers of
formula HO(C2H4O)b(C3H6O)a(C2H4O)bH, and the references Appellants
rely on to show possession of the octoblock copolymers were cited only in
the context of methods of synthesizing those linear copolymers. Thus, the
’271 application thus does not provide written description support for the
now claimed invention and Appellants are not entitled to an effective filing
date of October 15, 1993. Therefore, the rejections of claims 1-5, 8-13, 16-
23, 26-31, 33-36, 38, and 41 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated
by Lemieux; claims 1, 6, 7, 9, 14, 15, 19, 24, 25, 27, 32, and 37 under
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013