Appeal 2007-0693
Application 10/188,519
1 Has the Examiner established that claims 5, 10, 15, and 20 are
2 indefinite?
3 Has the Examiner established the unpatentability of claims 1-20 over
4 the applied prior art?
5
6 FINDINGS OF FACT
7 1. The subject matter of claims 5, 10, 15, and 20 is expressly
8 described in the Specification, as originally filed.
9 (Specification 5:22-31.)
10 2. Claim 5, as originally filed, recites: “The non-aqueous
11 electrolyte secondary battery of claim 1 wherein the binder
12 comprises –COO- Na+ or –COO- K+.”
13 3. The Specification indicates to one skilled in the relevant art
14 that the term “acrylate” or “methacrylate,” which is a
15 comonomer in the binder copolymer, is inclusive of sodium
16 or potassium salts of (meth)acrylic acid, such as potassium
17 (meth)acrylate. (Specification 5:22-31.)
18 4. Webster’s New World Dictionary 13, 853 (3rd ed., 1991)
19 defines “acrylate” as “a salt of acrylic acid containing the
20 radical C3H3O2 and used as a monomer to form various
21 acrylic polymers.” (Br., Evidence Appendix #1.)
22 5. Further, Webster’s defines “methacrylate” as “a salt or ester
23 of methacrylic acid.” (Br., Evidence Appendix #1.)
24 6. Appealed claims 5, 10, 15, and 20 specify particular salt
25 forms of the interpolymers recited in base claims 1 and 11.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013