Appeal No. 2000-2146
Application No. 09/197,513
argues that one of ordinary skill in the art would not have
substituted each single bare conductor in Guilleaume with two
insulated conductors based on the teachings of Tessier (brief,
page 11). Appellant further asserts that “[s]uch a modification
would result in insulated conductors being placed within grooves
of the insulating strip for being further insulated from each
other, resulting in a redundant, double-insulating solid
structure” (oral hearing, brief, page 13 and reply brief, page
3). Appellant recognizes that Simons discloses partially
shielding compartments formed of fins (brief, page 14), and
Guilleaume teaches a metallic covering as the peripheral
protection (brief, page 16). However, Appellant argues that one
of ordinary of skill in the art would not have found any
suggestion or motivation to combine the references to form the
claimed two-part shielding structure for communication cables
(oral hearing and brief, page 16).
The focus of the Examiner’s arguments is that substituting
twisted pairs of insulated conductors for bare conductors would
not result in redundancy or any change in the main purpose of
Guilleaume since both kinds of conductors can be used for
transmitting signals (answer, page 7). The Examiner also asserts
that inserting a metal tape in the insulative rod of Guilleaume
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007