Appeal No. 2004-2354
Application No. 09/923,991 Page 11
with Jordan, the examiner has reasonably determined that it would
have been prima facie obvious to provide the capsules
(macrosphere particles) of Courtney in the fluid of Jordan to
improve the impact resistance of the device of Jordan. As for
the claimed size range, the examiner has reasonably determined
that one of ordinary skill in the art would have readily
determined workable sizes for the capsules within the claim size
range based on the teachings of Courtney to use capsules that
could include millimeter size capsules. We agree.
Appellant argues that there is no suggestion to add a
capsule filled fluid, such as disclosed in Courtney, to the
enclosed foam device of Jordan because there would be no need for
both the foam and the capsules to absorb applied force or impact
energy. We disagree. One of ordinary skill in the art would
have clearly recognized the advantage of adding additional shock
absorbing capacity to the device of Jordan, via the capsules of
Courtney, to obtain the additive effects of the energy absorbing
capacity of the foam and the capsule filled fluid. See In re
Kerkhoven, 626 F.2d 846, 850, 205 USPQ 1069, 1072 (CCPA 1980).
After all, Jordan (column 2, lines 49 and 50) discloses using
semifluid substances with air bubbles therein as an option to add
compressibility (energy absorption capacity) to the fluid and
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007