Appeal No. 2001-0176 Page 4
Application No. 08/958,595
established how the thermoformable polymeric material substrate
of Koskenmaki meets the thin-walled shaped limitation of claim 1.
Nor has the examiner satisfactorily explained why one of ordinary
skill in the art would have been led to employ a 1-50 micron
thick conductive metal vapor coating on such a thin-walled shaped
thermoformable material as opposed to using the metal fiber mat
taught by Koskenmaki. Moreover, the examiner has not shown how
either Gallagher or Shimmyo would cure the above-noted
deficiencies with respect to the separately stated rejections
employing those references.
It is perhaps even more significant that, in assessing the
patentability of the claimed subject matter, the examiner’s
answer does not even address much less refute the declaration
evidence presented by appellant. On such a record, we can find
no basis for affirming the stated rejections.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007