Appeal No. 2005-1484
Application 09/486,875
holding the gaskets in place during the curing or vulcanizing process forming the completed joint
with uncured or vulcanizable rubber 26 which bonds the gasket sections (page 1, second col., l.
32, to page 2, first col., l. 32). Thus, Eagles would not have taught one of ordinary skill in this
art to rebuild the removed portions of the gasket sections, and we find no teaching or suggestion
in the teachings in Mathellier to rebuild the outer face or surface of sealing portion 4 of the
disclosed sealing strip as shown in Mathellier Fig. 1 (e.g., col. 3, l. 57, to col. 4, l. 4) which
would have led this person to rebuild the interior or back portion of the gasket sections of Eagles.
Accordingly, we are of the opinion that at best, the combined teachings of Eagles and
Mathellier would have reasonably suggested to one of ordinary skill in this art to inject the
bonding material 26 rather than insert a piece of such material between the two gasket sections in
the mold of Eagles which, of course, would not have resulted in the claimed method
encompassed by the appealed claims. Uniroyal, Inc. v. Rudkin-Wiley Corp., 837 F.2d 1044,
1050-54, 5 USPQ2d 1434, 1438-41 (Fed. Cir. 1988).
The examiner’s decision is reversed.
\
February 17, 2004 (answer, page 3).
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007