Appeal No. 2004-1879
Application No. 9/915,528
Appellants argue that Wargotz and McGregor only show
cables with a two layer sheath of insulation material.
Appellants assert that these references are completely silent on
the relative tensile strength and elongation at break of the
inner and outer layers. Appellants also argue that the
examiner’s assertion that since the inner layer includes
additives, the values for tensile strength and elongation at
break of the inner layer are significantly lower than those of
the outer layer is mere supposition, has no technical basis, and
is not true. Finally, appellants argue that there is no
motivation to combine Wargotz with McGregor in the manner
proposed by the examiner because the additives taught by McGregor
are particular to the application for the cable in McGregor and
would have no utility in the application of the Wargotz cable
[brief, pages 4-11].
The examiner responds that McGregor teaches the
advantages of modifying the cable in Wargotz and that appellants
have simply found a new advantage for this combination. The
examiner asserts that the references can be combined because they
both relate to the field of power cables [answer, pages 6-9].
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007