Appeal 2007-2135
Application 10/269,840
As noted above, the Examiner attempts to provide reasons for the
combination of Früh with Noecker ‘320 (Answer 4), but we find no factual
basis for the Examiner’s rationale that one of ordinary skill in the art would
have employed the sulfur vulcanizing agent and accelerator taught by Früh
in the sulfur-free method and system disclosed by Noecker '320. Contrary to
the Examiner’s rationale, Noecker '320 teaches that amines should be
avoided in the latex composition to preclude the formation of nitrosamines
and does not indicate that sulfur should be employed as a vulcanizing agent
or for any other use. See Noecker '320, col. 3, ll. 35-51, where it is taught
that nitrosamines are often generated from antioxidants or other amine
compounds; and col. 5, ll. 7-11, where the reference teaches the use of a
“non-amine antioxidizing agent” so that the latex contains substantially no
nitrosamines. Furthermore, Noecker '320 teaches that all amines should be
eliminated from the latex formulation so that undesirable amines are not in
the finished product (col. 7, ll. 59-61). These teachings agree with Früh,
who more narrowly teaches that secondary amines should be avoided since
they form nitrosamines due to the interaction of the secondary amines with
the environment (col. 1, ll. 37-42).
We determine that Noecker '320 teaches sulfur-free rubber latex
compositions with the following explanation (col. 1, l. 61-col. 2, l. 8):
Although products formed from such sulphur-cured natural
rubber exhibits[sic] some very good qualities, including
strength, toughness, elasticity, etc. and are used very effectively
in many applications, there are some areas or applications
where compatibility problems arise due to the chemicals
incorporated into the rubber which react undesirably with
foreign materials contacted by products formed from the rubber
during the products’ subsequent use. Particularly, the sulphur,
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013