Appeal No. 1997-4200
Application No. 08/428,790
still tacky from the extrusion coating process.” (Examiner’s
answer, page 4.) The examiner then concludes:
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill
in the art at the time of the invention to provide
the heat necessary for bonding the wires together by
using the latent heat of extrusion, as does Wermine,
because it eliminates the need for Bullock’s hot air
oven. [Examiner’s answer, pp. 4-5.]
We disagree with the examiner’s analysis. Appealed claim
1, step (c), recites: “moving both conductors into an extruder
means which coats each conductor separately and independently
with a heated thermoplastic electrical insulation material...”
(Emphasis added.) There is no teaching, suggestion, or
motivation in either of the applied prior art references to
modify Bullock’s process to include step (c) as recited in
appealed claim 1. Although Bullock teaches that the
thermoplastic insulation material 2 can be extruded onto the
conductor 1 (column 4, lines 9-11), the reference is silent as
to the specific method by which the insulation material is
coated onto the conductor.
To account for the differences between Bullock’s process
and the invention as recited in the appealed claims, the
examiner relies upon Wermine. But Wermine, like Bullock, does
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007