Ex Parte Junjie

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Feb 13, 2009

10871893 (B.P.A.I. Feb. 13, 2009)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________

Ex parte HAO JUNJIE
____________

Appeal 2008-4929
Application 10/871,893
Technology Center 1700
____________

Decided:1 February 13, 2009
____________

Before BRADLEY R. GARRIS, PETER F. KRATZ, and LINDA M.
GAUDETTE, Administrative Patent Judges.

GARRIS, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner’s
decision rejecting claims 1-39. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6.

1 The two-month time period for filing an appeal or commencing a civil
action, as recited in 37 C.F.R. § 1.304, begins to run from the decided date
shown on this page of the decision. The time period does not run from the
Mail Date (paper delivery) or Notification Date (electronic delivery).
Appeal 2008-4929
Application 10/871,893

We AFFIRM.
Statement of the Case
Appellant claims an article of manufacture comprising a PVC glove
having certain properties such as tensile strength, modulus of elasticity, and
durometer hardness reading. The glove may be made from first and second
polyvinyl chloride resins having certain degrees of polymerization which
differ from one another. Appellant also claims a method of forming such a
glove.
This claimed subject matter is adequately represented by independent
claims 1, 12, and 23, which read as follows:
1. A disposable glove comprising polyvinyl chloride having a
tensile strength before aging of at least about 12 Mpa as measured in
accordance with ASTM D 412-98a on a glove sample having a thickness at
the hand area of from about 0.08mm to about 0.12mm, and a modulus of
elasticity of less than about 2.5 Mpa as measured in accordance with ASTM
D 412-98a on a glove sample having a thickness at the hand area of from
about 0.08mm to about 0.12mm, and wherein the material forming the glove
is substantially impermeable to liquid water.

12. A disposable glove comprising a first polyvinyl chloride resin
having a degree of polymerization of from about 1,400 to about 1,700 as
measured in accordance with JIS K 6721-77, a second polyvinyl chloride
resin having a degree of polymerization of at least 1,750 as measured in
accordance with JIS K 6721-77, a plasticizer and an elastomer.

23. A disposable glove comprising polyvinyl chloride having a
durometer hardness reading less than 56 on a glove sample having a
thickness at the hand area of from about 0.08mm to about 0.12mm, and a
compressive strength of less than about 230 Mpa at 0.100 inch deflection on
a glove sample having a thickness at the hand area of from about 0.08mm to
about 0.12mm, and wherein the material forming the glove is substantially
impermeable to liquid water.

2
Appeal 2008-4929
Application 10/871,893

All appealed claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Vande Pol (US 6,016,570).
Issue
Has Appellant shown error in the Examiner’s obviousness conclusion
with respect to the independent claim limitations involving modulus of
elasticity (claim 1), tensile strength (claims 1 and 6), durometer hardness
reading (claim 23), and first and second polyvinyl chloride resins having
certain degrees of polymerization which differ from one another (claims 12
and 30)?
Findings of Fact
Vande Pol discloses a disposable medical glove made from polyvinyl
chloride having a sprayed coating thereon to provide desirable properties
(abstract; materials-list table at col. 9-12). The polyvinyl chloride may be
made from a mixture of different polyvinyl chloride resins (EXAMPLE 1 at
col. 11).
Vande Pol teaches that medical gloves must possess certain
characteristics such as strength and modulus of elasticity (col. 1, ll. 12-20;
para. bridging col. 1-2).
The gloves of Vande Pol’s invention are explicitly disclosed as
possessing properties which include modulus of elasticity, tensile strength,
and hardness (col. 3, ll. 24-45; Table II at col. 8).
Based on these findings, the Examiner determines that the
independent claim features are either disclosed by, or would have been an
obvious optimization over, Vande Pol (Ans. 3-5).

3
Appeal 2008-4929
Application 10/871,893

Principles of Law
The discovery of an optimum value of a result effective variable is
ordinarily within the skill of the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276
(CCPA 1980). See also In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578 (Fed. Cir.
1990) and In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456 (CCPA 1955).
Analysis
As an initial matter, we observe that the dependent claims on appeal
have not been separately argued by Appellant in the Appeal Brief (App. Br.
6-7). Therefore, these claims will stand or fall with their parent independent
claims. See 37 C.F.R. § 41.37 (c)(1)(vii).
Appellant argues that Vande Pol does not disclose, teach, or suggest
the independent claim features relating to:
“tensile strength before aging of at least about 12 Mpa as
measured in accordance with ASTM D 412-98a on a glove sample having a
thickness at the hand area of from about 0.08mm to about 0.12mm” (claim
1; see also claim 6);
“modulus of elasticity of less than about 2.5 Mpa as measured
in accordance with ASTM D 412-98a on a glove sample having a thickness
at the hand area of from about 0.08mm to about 0.12mm” (claim 1);
“durometer hardness reading less than 56 on a glove sample
having a thickness at the hand area of from about 0.08mm to about 0.12mm”
(claim 23); and
“a first polyvinyl chloride resin having a degree of
polymerization of from about 1,400 to about 1,700 as measured in
accordance with JIS K 6721-77, a second polyvinyl chloride resin having a
4
Appeal 2008-4929
Application 10/871,893

degree of polymerization of at least 1,750 as measured in accordance with
JIS K 6721-77” (claim 12; see also claim 30).
(App. Br. 5-7; Reply Br. 2-4).
It is true that Vande Pol does not expressly disclose the specific values
as measured by the standards recited in the above-quoted claim limitations.
Nevertheless, as reflected by the earlier listed findings, Vande Pol evidences
that variables known to be result effective in this art include modulus of
elasticity, tensile strength, hardness, and the different types of polyvinyl
chloride resins which are intermixed in forming the polyvinyl chloride glove
product. For this reason, and because the discovery of an optimum value for
a result effective variable is ordinarily within the skill of the art, the record
before us supports a conclusion that the above-quoted claim features would
have been obvious to an artisan with ordinary skill. The Appellant’s general
assertion to the contrary reveals no error in the Examiner’s obviousness
conclusion.
Conclusion of Law
Appellant has not shown error in the Examiner’s obviousness
conclusion with respect to the independent claim limitations involving
modulus of elasticity (claim 1), tensile strength (claims 1 and 6), durometer
hardness reading (claim 23), and first and second polyvinyl chloride resins
having certain degrees of polymerization which differ from one another
(claims 12 and 30).
We sustain, therefore, the Examiner’s § 103 rejection of all appealed
claims as being unpatentable over Vande Pol.
Order
The decision of the Examiner is affirmed.
5
Appeal 2008-4929
Application 10/871,893

No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv).

AFFIRMED

ssl

NIXON PEABODY LLP
161 N. CLARK STREET
48TH FLOOR
CHICAGO, IL 60601-3213

6