Appeal 2007-3386
Application 10/375,889
Ohta to render this claimed feature obvious to one of ordinary skill are not
persuasive for several reasons. In particular, we agree with the Examiner
Ohta teaches that the use of N-methylolacrylamide as part of an ink resin is
attended by an advantageous property (wash resistance) for the ink, which
property would not be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art as
depending on the co-use of a pigment in the ink (Answer 16-17, Ohta, col. 4,
ll. 28-31). Hence, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to
employ a copolymer including N-methylolacrylamide in the resin of the ink
of Fukushima to obtain such an advantageous property for the ink.
Moreover, Appellants’ suggestion that the use of such a resin
ingredient in the ink of Fukushima would result in compatibility/clogging
problems is speculative and unpersuasive absent objective evidence
establishing such an expectation from one of ordinary skill in the art (Br. 7).
In addition, we note that representative claim 1 only requires the resin binder
composition to be capable of cross-linking and include a copolymer of at
least one of the listed monomers in polymer form in the copolymer. In this
regard, Fukushima makes it clear that the resin component employed is not
restricted to exclude any particular monomers, including the monomers
listed in representative claim 1 so long as the resin can be dissolved or
emulsified in a water or alcohol based solvent. (Fukushima, ¶ 0018).
Indeed, Fukushima discloses acrylic acid copolymers as being useful. Also,
the copolymer resins described by Ohta are disclosed as being capable of
being dispersed in an aqueous vehicle (Ohta; col. 3, l. 64- col. 4, l. 31).
Given the above and for the reasons stated by the Examiner in the Answer,
we determine that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the
art to employ a known copolymer of the type required by representative
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013