Appeal No. 96-2726
Application 08/005,401
impress wet fibrous material, fail to teach or suggest making
watermark paper. Edge, who places the fabric pattern on felts,
not the claimed cylinder mold or dandy roll, relates to
manufacturing relatively thick sheet material such as wall boards
or insulating boards. Similarly, Izard, who fails to disclose
the claimed step of fixing a fibrous pattern to a cylinder mold
or a dandy roll, teaches the production of fiber board.
In our view, the only teaching of using lace made from
natural or synthetic fiber to manufacture watermark paper
emanates from appellants’ specification which, of course, cannot
be relied upon to establish obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
In our opinion, the examiner has resorted to impermissible
hindsight in concluding that the claimed method would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, the examiner’s
decision rejecting the appealed claims is reversed.
REVERSED
EDWARD C. KIMLIN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
CHARLES F. WARREN ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007