Appeal No. 1998-2590
Application No. 08/255,083
Looking first at the examiner’s rejection of claims 1
through 4 and 8 through 11 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based on
the collective teachings of Yamamoto, Powers and Shealy, we
note that Yamamoto discloses a method of manufacturing an
insulated electric power cable that includes a cured
insulation material (3) applied over a conductor (1, 2) and a
layer of plastic compound (5) comprising a thermoplastic resin
and 5-70 parts by weight of calcium oxide as a moisture-
absorbing agent overlying the insulating material. In column
2, lines 30-41, it is indicated that
[t]he presence of calcium oxide in the layer of
plastic compound provided on electric conductors in
accordance with this invention serves to give an
insulation layer of polyethylene which is free of
microvoids. The formation of micro-voids within the
insulation layer is usually attributable to the invasion
of steam during the curing process, using saturated steam
as the heating medium. But when the calcium oxide-
containing layer is provided over the insulation layer or
between the conductor and the insulation layer, any
invading steam can be caught or absorbed by the calcium
oxide, serving in this case as the moisture-absorbing
agent.
As is argued by appellant (brief, page 7), Yamamoto has
absolutely nothing to do with aeolian and galloping vibrations
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007