Appeal No. 96-0205
Application No. 08/000,946
in a preferred embodiment (appealed claims 26-38) is a blend3
of natural rubber and a copolymer of styrene and butadiene.
As evidence of obviousness of the claimed subject matter
on appeal, the examiner relies on the combined disclosures in
Young and Wirth. We reverse the stated rejection based on
Young and Wirth because the examiner has failed to establish
an adequate factual basis to support a legal conclusion of
obviousness of the claimed subject matter. While it is
undisputed that Young discloses a vulcanizable rubber
composition identical to the composition used by appellants in
their invention, Young uses the composition to form a tire
tread, not a tire carcass as claimed herein, and as emphasized
in the Young declaration of record, this prior art patent4
does not teach any property of this composition that would be
desirable for a tire carcass. See paragraph 4 of page 4 of
the declaration. That Wirth discloses that a specific EPDM
3Carcasses for passenger vehicle tires are usually made
from blends of natural rubber and SBR (styrene butadiene
rubber). See page 210 of Natural Rubber and the Synthetics,
Allen et al. (Allen), published by John Wiley & Sons, pp. 208-
211, © 1972, a publication of record herein.
4This declaration was filed with appellants’ reply brief
on August 21, 1995.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007