Appeal No. 2001-0444 Page 8
Application No. 08/949,803
With regard to a prima facie case of obviousness, appellant contends that there
is no motivation for combining the references. In particular, appellant argues that there
is no suggestion for modifying the references with regard to surrounding the core
structure with a conductive layer other than steel adapted to protect against underwater
influences, and surrounding the conductive layer with first and second layers of strength
members. Appellant urges that each of the references surrounds the fiber optic cores
with plastic materials (30 in Arroyo 442 and 060 and 33, 35 and 36 in Gareis) and that
even though Gareis shows braided copper conductor layers 37 and 38, these layers
send electrical power and they are not surrounded by first and second strength
members.
With regard to protection against underwater influences, we have treated this
supra and need not repeat it here.
With regard to the motivation to combine the references, we agree with appellant
that there is nothing within the disclosures of Arroyo 442 and Gareis that would have
suggested taking the braided copper cables 37 and 38 of Gareis and placing such a
copper cable, or cables, between Arroyo 442's fiber optic cable core 22 and strength
member 32 in the cable of Arroyo 442 such that the copper conductors would surround
Arroyo 442's fiber optic cable core 22 and be itself surrounded by the strength member
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007