Appeal No. 1997-1448
Application 08/097,140
comprises at least two superposed sheets of woven reinforcing fabric contained
within a sheet matrix of a solid curable resin composition. However, the composite is
not a prepreg, since the woven reinforcing fabric is not preimpregnated with a solid
curable resin.
Moreover, the entire thrust of Letterman’s invention is to teach away from the
use of preimpregnated fiber plies. See column 1, line 29 - column 2, line 26.
Indeed, Letterman states that, “[t]he invention is directed to avoiding the disadvantage of
creating monolithic structures from preimpregnated fibrous layers.” See column 2,
lines 13-15. Accordingly, we determine that the examiner has not established any
motivation for the impregnation of Letterman’s dry preforms. Hence a curable
prepeg as required by the claimed subject matter is not suggested by Letterman.
In view of the above analysis, we have determined that the examiner’s legal
conclusion of obviousness is not supported by the facts. “Where the legal
conclusion [of obviousness] is not supported by the facts it cannot stand.” In re
Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017, 154 USPQ 173, 178 (CCPA 1967).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007