Ex parte BROWN et al. - Page 3




          Appeal No. 95-3782                                                          
          Application 08/048,371                                                      


          surrounded conductors.                                                      

               The examiner relies upon the following references as                   
          evidence of obviousness:                                                    

          Eager, Jr. et al. (Eager)        3,745,231        Jul. 10,                  
          1973                                                                        
          Foster et al. (Foster)           4,895,885        Jan. 23,                  
          1990                                                                        
               Appellants rely on the following references to rebut the               
          examiner’s evidence of obviousness:                                         

          ASTM Designation: D 4568-86, “Standard Test Methods for                     
          Evaluating Compatibility between Cable Filling and Flooding                 
          Compounds and Polyolefin Cable Materials,” Annual Book of ASTM              
          Standards, pp. 666-670, April 1986;                                         
          Davis, “A Global Test Method for Long Term Stability of Solid               
          and Foam Skin Insulation,” Proceedings of the Thirty-Sixth                  
          International Wire and Cable Symposium, pp. 475-476, Nov. 17-               
          19, 1987.                                                                   

               Claims 1-11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as                    
          unpatentable over Eager in view of Foster.  We affirm this                  
          rejection for reasons which follow.                                         

                                       OPINION                                        
               The article of manufacture recited in appealed claim 1                 


                                          3                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007