Appeal No. 1997-3620 Page 2
Application No. 08/386,795
reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was involved. Stratoflex, Inc. v.
Aeroquip Corp., 713 F.2d 1530, 1535, 218 USPQ (BNA) 871, 876 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
In this case, the appropriateness of the scope and content of the prior art is in dispute. Legue
‘682 is directed to adhesive compositions, while appellants’ claim 10 is directed to a molding process
for the production of composite materials.
Nothing in the record correlates the disclosed adhesive compositions of Legue ‘682 with
achieving desirable characteristics in a molding process for the production of composite materials, such
as satisfactory mold release properties.
The examiner states that “one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to model
ricinoleate-based adhesive compositions for a wide array of adhesive applications, including the
production of composites” (Answer, page 7). However, the record is silent as to why one of ordinary
skill in the art would use the adhesive composition in Legue ‘682 in a molding process, having desirable
properties, such as mold release properties, for the production of a composite material. Therefore, in
concluding that obviousness was established by the teachings in Legue ‘682, the examiner has ignored
the principle that there must have been something present in those teachings to suggest to one skilled in
the art that the claimed invention would have been obvious. In re Bergel, 292 F.2d 955, 956-57,
130 USPQ 206, 208 (CCPA 1961);
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007