Appeal 2007-1381
Application 10/686,069
forming tube and to add a sizing compound that provides the claimed
impermeability to the liquid coating composition but remains pervious to
vapors. This is because McClellan specifically requires the addition of a
release agent, silicone being the only such agent disclosed (FF 3), and there
is no suggestion in the art that a sizing agent such as that disclosed in Pauley
would provide the required release property.
The Examiner relies upon the disclosure in Pauley that the sizing
agent imparts stain resistance to aqueous fluids as a basis for concluding the
sizing agent would serve as a release agent because staining is a type of
bonding (Answer 6). The Examiner states that:
As stated by applicant at page 2, lines 1-5 of the instant
specification, it is conventional in the art of paper tubes used in
glass fiber production, to coat the paper tubes with silicone to
render them impervious to the liquid of the aqueous binder that
coats the glass fiber during production. The conventional
silicone coatings thus serve the purpose of preventing
penetration of the aqueous coating into the paper to preserve
strength as admitted by appellant and also the purpose of
preventing bonding of the aqueous coating with the paper tube
to allow release and removal of the coated glass fiber from the
paper tube as taught by McClellan.
The position of the examiner is that the size of Pauley et
al. would serve similar dual purposes since it excludes wetting
of the paperboard as well as resists staining, which is a type of
bonding. A prevention of the formation of any bond between
the size and paper of the tube would aide in release and removal
of the dried glass fiber. Thus use of the size of Pauley et al. as
an agent to resist water but still allow vapor permeability,
instead of a silicone coating that blocks both, would not destroy
the function of release of the glass fiber from the paper tube of
McClelland [sic, McClellan].
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013