Appeal No. 2003-0895
Application No. 09/549,703
combination of the relative widths of the belt reinforcing member
and the wave or zigzag shaped reinforcing elements results in a
prevention of "the separation failure in the vicinity of the
widthwise outer end of the widest-width belt reinforcing layer"
(page 8 of principal brief, first paragraph). Also, appellants
maintain that:
The wave or zigzag reinforcing elements, which are
capable of stretching in the circumferential direction,
are used in the belt reinforcing layer that is wider
than the belt layer, so that it is possible to deform
the widthwise outer end portion of the belt reinforcing
layer in a stretching direction against dragging at the
ground contact region" (id.).
Appealed claims 8, 10, 15 and 16 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Iwata in view of
Kohno.
We have thoroughly reviewed the respective positions
advanced by appellants and the examiner. In so doing, we concur
with appellants that the prior art cited by the examiner fails to
establish a prima facie case of obviousness for the claimed
subject matter. Accordingly, we will not sustain the examiner's
rejection for essentially those reasons expressed by appellants
in the principal and reply briefs on appeal.
There is no dispute that Iwata, like appellants, discloses a
pneumatic radial tire having the presently claimed relationship
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007