Appeal 2007-3374
Application 10/448,758
selected areas via including a curing agent or cure altering agent to the ink
pattern. Finally, Schneider is not relied on to teach or suggest the addition
of a flattening agent to the inner ink layer (Answer 6-9). Hence, we do not
find any reason or explanation proffered by the Examiner that would have
prompted one of ordinary skill in the art to employ a flattening agent in the
inner ink layer covered by a photo-curable coating composition having
desired differential gloss. See Answer in its entirety.
Accordingly, we are constrained to agree with the Appellants that the
Examiner has not established a prima facie case of obviousness within the
meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 103 or a prima facie case of unpatentability within
the meaning of the judicially-created doctrine of obviousness-type double
patenting.
ORDER
The decision of the Examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
tf/ls
ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, INC.
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
P. O. BOX 3001
LANCASTER, PA 17604-3001
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Last modified: September 9, 2013