Appeal No. 2000-0650
Application No. 08/599,668
and using various additives to the insulating layer
before this layer is applied around the conductor.
[Italics added].
Therefore the examiner’s use of appellants’ admission is
factually incorrect, since the admitted prior art as disclosed on
page 1 of the specification adds an amide lubricant to the
insulating layer composition and not as an external lubricant to
the insulating layer as required by claim 22 on appeal. This
factual error is also apparent from a review of appellants’
“admitted prior art” (see the Answer, pages 3-4) where the
examiner cites GB 1175059, GB 1175060, and the English equivalent
to DE 1947071 (GB 1230189; Answer, page 4). Each of these
documents discloses a sheath of polyolefin as an insulating layer
surrounding an electrical cable, where the polyolefin is blended
with various additives such as an amide lubricant (e.g., see GB
1175059, page 1, ll. 39-46; page 1, l. 86-page 2, l. 18; and the
Example at page 2, ll. 88-108).
The examiner’s reliance on Saunders 4,350,737 (hereafter
Saunders ‘737), incorporated by reference in Saunders (col. 2,
ll. 63-67), is also misplaced. The examiner finds that Saunders
‘737 teaches esters as a conventional external lubricant, citing
col. 5, ll. 53-68 (Answer, page 5). However, Saunders ‘737
teaches esters as a class can be used as lubricants “according to
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007