Ex Parte Neal et al - Page 2




             Appeal No. 2003-1796                                                               Page 2                
             Application No. 09/513,563                                                                               


                                                  BACKGROUND                                                          
                    The appellants' invention relates to flexible body armor designed to defeat high-                 
             velocity projectiles (specification, p. 1).  A copy of the claims under appeal is set forth in           
             the appendix to the appellants' brief.                                                                   


                    Claims 1, 5 to 10, 16 and 23 to 28 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as                        
             being unpatentable over either Dunbar1 or Rudoi2, in view of Chediak3.  The examiner's                   
             complete reasoning in support of the rejection (final rejection, pp. 2-3) is as follows:                 
                           Dunbar discloses a disc shaped armor plate (figure 5) having a first                       
                    inclined surface, which extends from the center dome portion of the disc and                      
                    leads to a substantially flat surface portion circumferentially extending around the              
                    inclined surface (i.e. the inclined surface flows into the substantially flat                     
                    circumferential surface and a containment wrap.) Rudoi likewise discloses a disc                  
                    shaped armor plate with containment wrap. (See Figures 14-30; column 8, lines                     
                    31-44, and column 10, lines 36-61.) Both Dunbar and Rudoi fail to disclose the                    
                    specific mechanical properties of the ceramic material used in making the discs                   
                    nor do they disclose using zirconia in the material forming the disc. It would have               
                    been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention               
                    was made to make the ceramic material have a hardness of at least 12 Gpa and                      
                    a fracture toughness of at least 3.8 Mpa-m(½), since it has been held that                        
                    discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine                 
                    skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272,205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). In view                    
                    of the teachings of Chediak, it would have been obvious to make the ceramic                       
                    disc with some zirconia in the material used to make the disc in order to increase                
                    the strength and fracture resistance of the disc to a high speed bullet.                          


                    1 U.S. Patent No. 3,563,836, issued February 16, 1971.                                            
                    2 U.S. Patent No. 4,633,756, issued January 6, 1987.                                              
                    3 U.S. Patent No. 5,824,940, issued October 20, 1998.                                             







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007