Appeal No. 2003-0332
Application 09/057,383
person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the suitability using linear
transverse grooves in a pneumatic tread design.
The Examiner states:
Shiraishi ‘prefers’ curved transverse grooves. However: The use of the
conventional linear transverse grooves for the one block row and the
other block row of Shiraishi is suggested by the prior art since (1)
Shiraishi (directed to a directional tire tread having excellent water
repellency) recognizes that variance from the constant angle alpha is
permitted (e.g. within ±5 degrees) and (2) linear transverse grooves
whose inclination angle changes from row to row is well known in the
tire art as evidenced by Williams (directed to a directional tire tread
having improved wet drainage and noise reduction) and Miller (directed
to a directional tire tread for evacuating water from the footprint/ground
contact configuration).
[Answer, p. 8].
We agree with the Examiner. Shiraishi’s admitted prior art, Miller and
Williams indicate that even if Shiraishi’s grooves must be curved, the curvature can
be minimal, such that the angles are substantially equal as required by the Appellant’s
claim. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to
determine suitable minimal degrees of curvature through no more than routine
experimentation. Discovery of the optimum or workable range through routine
experimentation does not impart patentability unless the results in the critical range
are unexpectedly good. See Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Labs., 874 F.2d 804, 809, 10
USPQ2d 1843, 1847 (Fed. Cir. 1989); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1470, 43
- 9 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007