Appeal No. 2003-1704
Application No. 09/604,141
Appellants argue (brief, page 8) that Shimirak uses an epoxy resin
to environmentally seal a coaxial cable 1000 to a cable tap housing
100, and that Shimirak does not disclose the use of a high flexural
strength rigid epoxy resin as a bonding agent that eliminates
movement between the coaxial cable and the housing. Appellants
also argue (brief, page 9; reply brief, page 6) that the examiner
has used impermissible hindsight to attribute the characteristics
of the epoxy resin disclosed and claimed by appellants to the epoxy
resin used by Shimirak.
We agree with appellants’ arguments. Appellants specifically
disclose (specification, page 11) a particular epoxy resin that
will perform the claimed functions of resisting movement and
rotation of the coaxial cable with respect to the annular locking
member. As indicated supra, Shimirak uses an epoxy resin for
environmentally sealing the coaxial cable to the cable tap housing.
Nothing in the applied references supports the examiner’s
conclusion that the skilled artisan would have known to select the
particular epoxy resin chosen by appellants to provide the claimed
resistance against movement and rotation. The only evidence of
record that supports the examiner’s contention is the appellants’
disclosure, and such evidence is not available to the examiner in
an obviousness rejection. Thus, the obviousness rejection of
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007