Appeal No. 1997-0110
Application 08/236,258
specification (page 1, lines 29-34) and the declaration by
Willwerth (filed September 17, 1998, attachment to paper no.
47) indicate that in the prior art, either fiber/matrix
polymer combinations were selected so that there was adhesion
between the fibers and the matrix, or the fibers were
pretreated to obtain such adhesion. The examiner has not
provided evidence which shows that one of ordinary skill in
the art would have considered a composite having fibers and a
matrix polymer which are unbonded to each other, such that the
fibers are able to move within the matrix, to be a useful
composite. Thus, the examiner has not established that the
prior art would have fairly suggested, to one of ordinary
skill in the art, eliminating Yagi’s silane modification of
the fibers along with its function of providing adhesion
between the fibers and the matrix.
For the above reasons we conclude that the examiner has
not carried the burden of establishing a prima facie case of
obviousness of the invention recited in any of appellant’s
claims. Accordingly, we reverse the rejection under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007