Appeal No. 2004-0461
Application No. 09/532,371
not describe the phosphorescent layer of the second embodiment as
containing rubber and "Rogal gives no examples in which rubber is
described as being a component in the phosphorescent layer when
it is applied to the outside of the sidewall rubber layer"
(page 13 of Answer, second paragraph), one of ordinary skill in
the art would have understood that Rogal teaches a phosphorescent
layer that is substantially free of rubber on the outer surface
of a tire. Although appellants urge that the so-called second
embodiment of Rogal vulcanizes the phosphorescent layer on the
side of the tire during pressing and vulcanizing, the examiner
responds that "it appears that Rogal intended the language
'vulcanize' to describe the color film as being applied and
joined during the vulcanization of the new tread rubber" (page 7
of Answer, second paragraph). As further evidence, the examiner
cites Kubota for using "the term 'vulcanizer' when describing a
component of the fluorescent layer - in this instance, though,
there is no rubber in the fluorescent layer" (page 8 of Answer,
first paragraph). Thus, the examiner concludes that "the use of
the term 'vulcanizer' or 'vulcanization' fails to require the
presence of rubber but rather identifies the respective layer as
being bonded or adhered during the vulcanization process" (id.).
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007