Appeal No. 2005-1487
Application No. 10/383,781
blends of aramid and FR rayon such as a 50/50, 65/35 or 35/65
blend of NOMEX IIIAŽ and FR rayon (Answer, page 3). The examiner
finds shrinkage values in accordance with AATCC Test Method 135-
1992 from Lunsford to be comparable to appellant’s shrinkage
values based on NFPA 1975-1999 (id.). The examiner recognizes
that Lunsford does not explicitly teach the abrasion resistance
recited in claim 9 on appeal, but concludes that it is reasonable
to believe that such a value is inherent to the fabric of
Lunsford since the dyed fabric blends include the same amounts
and types of materials (id.) as well as common properties
(Answer, page 5).
Appellant argues that an anticipation rejection based on
inherency must show that the allegedly inherent characteristic
necessarily flows from the prior art teachings (Brief, page 5;
Reply Brief, page 2). Appellant argues that the examiner’s
position takes no account of the different process for dyeing the
fabric, which produces a material and unobvious impact upon its
physical characteristics as shown by Table 1 (Brief, page 5;
Reply Brief, page 3; see Table 1 on page 4 of the specification
or page 3 of the Brief). Finally, appellant argues that our
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007