Ex Parte THOMAS et al - Page 3




         Appeal No. 2000-1435                                            3          
         Application No. 08/601,785                                                 


         Aubert                       5,422,377              Jun. 06, 1995          

         Polyurethane Handbook: Chemistry-Raw Material-Processing                   
         Properties, pp. 248-49 (Hansen Pub., New York, 1985).                      

              Claims 1 through 23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                    
         § 103 as being unpatentable over the Polyurethane Handbook in              
         view of Aubert, Martini-Vvedensky, or Cha.                                 

                                      OPINION                                       
              For the reasons set forth in appellants’ brief and reply              
         brief, and below, we reverse the aforementioned rejection.                 
              On page 6 of the brief, appellants state that none of the             
         references teach the aspect of their claimed invention regarding           
         cells having a dimension in a direction parallel to the opposed            
         surfaces greater than a dimension in a direction parallel to the           
         thickness dimension (expansion in only the thickness direction).           
         Appellants also state that none of the references teach                    
         saturating the preformed object with a fluid in an atmosphere at           
         a predetermined ambient pressure, and then reducing the ambient            
         pressure to a pressure at which the preformed object is                    
         supersaturated with the fluid.  We agree.                                  
              We further note that the excerpt on page 249 of the                   
         Polyurethane Handbook teaches that the cells are elongated in the          
         direction of the rise which is opposite of the requirement set             
         forth in appellants’ claim 1, for example.  The examiner                   
         recognizes this deficiency in the Polyurethane Handbook but                
         states, on page 5 of the answer, that, “[w]ith regard to                   
         thickness dimension [it] is deemed that one skilled in the art             
         would consider the thickness dimension and the cell formation              
         therein would be well within the skill of the routineer to                 





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007