Appeal No. 1997-2073 7
Application No. 08/308,639
444 F.2d 1168, 170 USPQ 285 (CCPA 1971); In re
Wood, 582 F.2d 638, 199 USPQ 137 (CCPA 1978).
Moreover, it would have been apparent to a worker
of ordinary skill in the art that the Price
configuration, wherein the sheath effectively
grips
the core, would also provide the improved adhesion
between polyamide and polyurethane components
attributed to [Tanaka's] configuration. Appellants
acknowledge that the Price components are recognized
to not be compatible and to share the problem
of poor adhesion as addressed by the Kanebo
composite filament (Appellants' Brief, page 7).
We adopt this determination as our own. Moreover, we note
that Tanaka teaches that its crimped composite fiber has a
boiling water shrinkage rate of 5-17%, the property disclosed
and recited in one of the claims. See page 6.
Appellants argue that Tanaka is incapable of producing
the claimed substantially uniform width, i.e., a standard
deviation about a mean value not exceeding 2.0%. Appellants
then go on to rely on the Rule 132 declarations dated November
14, 1994, and November 6, 1995. We are not persuaded by
either appellants’ argument or declarations. As is apparent
from page 24 of the appellants’ own specification, Tanaka’s
method is capable of forming a crimped composite fiber having
an exposed polyurethane core component having the claimed
substantially uniform width, i.e., a standard deviation about
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007