Appeal No. 2001-0382
Application No. 08/861,481
After careful review of the applied Brorein and Newmoyer ‘173
references, we find ourselves in agreement with the Examiner’s
position as stated in the Answer. As asserted by the Examiner
(Answer, pages 10 and 11), Appellants’ arguments have relied on a
misinterpretation of the disclosure of Brorein. Contrary to
Appellants’ contention that Brorein discloses that the plural
conductor pairs are to be of the same twist length, Brorein’s
disclosure actually provides for the individual conductors in each
conductor pair as having the same twist length. In our view,
rather than teaching away from a cable structure with plural
conductor pairs having differing twist lengths, Brorein is silent
about the twist length configuration for the plural conductor
pairs. In our opinion, the skilled artisan seeking guidance on
designing the twist length arrangement for a multiple conductor
pair cable would be led to the teachings of Newmoyer ‘173 which
clearly discloses (column 3, lines 59-65 and column 4, lines 4-10)
that providing adjacent twisted conductor pairs with differing
twist lengths reduces crosstalk and permits flexing of the cable
without damaging the conductor spacing of the cable.
In view of the above discussion and the totality of the
evidence on the record, it is our opinion that the Examiner has
established a prima facie case of obviousness which has not been
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007