Appeal No. 2004-1784
Application No. 09/685,372
rubber track with an inside rubber layer which generally
corresponds to the here claimed guide lug support layer, fails to
identify this inside rubber layer as having the rubber
composition defined by appealed independent claim 1. In the
examiner’s view, however, it would have been obvious for an
artisan to modify the Yokohama Rubber Co. reference so that the
inside rubber layer is comprised of the composition in question
in view of Sandstrom who is said to teach such a rubber
composition. We cannot agree.
This is because the rubber composition of Sandstrom is for
the preparation of the tread and sidewall components of tires
designed for relatively heavy loads such as truck tires (e.g.,
see the Abstract and the first paragraph on page 2). We find
nothing and the examiner points to nothing in the applied prior
art which would have suggested that a rubber composition suitable
for preparing the tread and sidewall components of such tires
also would be suitable for preparing the inside rubber layer of
the endless rubber track taught by the Yokohama Rubber Co.
reference. Likewise, we find nothing and the examiner points to
nothing which would have given an artisan a reasonable
expectation that Sandstrom’s tire tread and sidewall composition
would be successful when used for preparing the inside rubber
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007