Appeal No. 95-4375
Application 08/153,491
Pollux Trust” (final rejection, page 2). While acknowledging
that Pollux Trust does not disclose that a moistening step would
be beneficial in a method like that of the Parker references, the
examiner contends that
this point has no bearing on the application or the
reasons why one of ordinary skill in the art would be
motivated by the combination or Pollux and Parker to
apply moisture to a sheet of paper. Pollux does
disclose that applying moisture to a paper sheet would
be helpful in the deformation of a paper sheet. Thus,
the combination of Parker and Pollux would motivate one
of ordinary skill in the art to apply moisture to a
sheet of paper “in order to make the subsequent
embossing durable and by this means to obtain the
conditions for a rapid working.” (page 3, lines 64-67
of Pollux). Furthermore, Pollux is considered
analogous art in that it deals with the same type of
problem that the appellant’s invention addresses, i.e.,
increasing the workability of the paper in a paper
deforming device and increasing the durability of the
folded/embossed area . . . . [answer, pages 4-5]
While we appreciate the examiner’s position, we do not agree
that it would have been obvious, in view of Pollux Trust, to
modify either of the Parker references in the manner proposed.
In essence, we consider that the subject matter of Pollux Trust
is too far-removed from that of the Parker references to have
suggested modifying the latter in the manner proposed by the
examiner. Although both the Parker references and Pollux Trust
broadly deal with deforming paper material, the Pollux Trust
apparatus utilizes positive forming devices (i.e., embossing mold
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007