Appeal No. 1998-1917
Application No. 08/766,984
during cooling by the higher thermal contraction rate
insulating material.
In our view, since Sato provides no recognition of the
advantages of thermal contraction rates in applying binding
pressure to the superconducting wires, any winding tension
optimization performed by the skilled artisan on Sato’s
insulating tape would be directed solely to that tension
necessary to accomplish Sato’s disclosed function of holding
the superconducting wires on the former support. As alluded
to by Appellants (Reply Brief, page 4), however, a loosely
wound tape might perform Sato’s disclosed purpose of fixing
the superconductor wires on the former, but would not
necessarily have the requisite winding tension to achieve the
desired binding pressure from thermal contraction during
cooling.
For the above reason, since all of the limitations of
independent claim 7 are not taught or suggested by the prior
art, the Examiner has not established a prima facie case of
obviousness. Accordingly, the Examiner’s 35 U.S.C. § 103
rejection of independent claim 7, as well as claims 9-15
dependent thereon, is not sustained.
13
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007