Appeal 2007-3684
Application 10/448,794
skill in the relevant field to combine the elements” in the manner claimed.
KSR, 127 S. Ct. at 1739, 82 USPQ2d at 1396.
Appellants’ principal argument is that Yu teaches away from the
claimed invention. Appellants contend that Yu teaches that enzyme
catalysts cannot be used in the production of polyesters wherein lactones are
ring opened in the presence of hydroxyl functional unsaturated initiators.
Thus, the Examiner erred in attempting to combine Yu, a reference which
teaches away from the claimed invention, with other references to establish
the obviousness of the claimed invention based on the disclosure of Yu. (Br.
12-18).
We do not find Appellants’ argument persuasive. Yu discloses the
production of polyesters wherein lactones are ring opened with a cationic
ring opening catalyst in the presence of hydroxyl functional unsaturated
initiators, such as hydroxyalkyl (meth)acrylates (Yu, col. 3, l. 13- col. 4, l.
65). Yu differs from the claimed invention in the use of an enzyme catalyst
in the formation of the polyester. Kobayashi describes a method for ring
opening polymerization utilizing an enzyme catalyst (Kobayashi, col. 1, ll.
7-12). Kobayashi discloses that conventional catalysts utilized for cationic
reactive monomers have several drawbacks, such as side reactions and the
incorporation of the catalyst into the polymer produced (Kobayashi, col. 1,
ll. 25-55). Kobayashi discloses suitable cyclic compounds for use with the
catalyst to include lactones (Kobayashi, col. 3, ll. 7-10). The Examiner cited
Gruning to establish that persons of ordinary skill in the art recognize that
enzyme catalysts are compatible with acrylate functional monomers
(Answer 4).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013