Appeal No. 1999-2461
Application No. 08/818,695
pages 4 through 7 of the examiner's answer.
OPINION
We have carefully reviewed the rejections on appeal in
light of the arguments of the appellants and the examiner. As
a result of this review, we have reached the determination
that the applied prior art does not establish the prima facie
obviousness of the subject matter on appeal. Consequently,
the rejections on appeal are reversed. Our reasons follow.
Turning to the patent of Rohn, we agree with the examiner
that Rohn discloses changing the surface characteristics of a
foam sheet by using a pattern of protrusions, grooves,
indentations, etc., on a pair of primary rollers. Col. 4,
lines 20 through 22. We further acknowledge, that the grid
work used to emboss the foam may be diagonally disposed. See
col. 4, line 27. Finally, we note Rohn's disclosure that the
pattern of embossing may "be of any design to accomplish the
desired amount of cell rupture."
That being said, we note that appellants provide the
three series of indentations intersecting at angles of 60E in
order to provide an exhaust path for vapors during curing of
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007