Appeal No. 1996-1878
Application No. 07/982,203
composition to form the bond. According to appellant, "[t]he
high green strength of the bond formed between the shoe
materials is sufficiently strong to permit the shoes to be
handled without a precuring step" (page 4 of principal brief).
Although not recited in independent claims 11 and 22, the bond
is strengthened by curing upon contact with moisture.
Appellant explains that the advantage of the claimed method is
that "shoes can be assembled utilizing the hot melt moisture
curable adhesive by applying the holtmelt adhesive to the
surfaces and joining the heated surfaces without a precuring
step" (page 4 of principal brief).
Appealed claims 11-13, 15-22 and 24-30 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Gilch in view of Rumon. Claims 11-
30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Gilch in view of König. In addition, claims 14 and 23
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Gilch in view Rumon and König.
We have thoroughly reviewed the respective positions
advanced by appellant and the examiner. In so doing, we find
ourselves in agreement with appellant that the prior art cited
by the examiner fails to establish a prima facie case of
obviousness for the claimed subject matter. Accordingly, we
will not sustain the examiner's rejections.
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007