Appeal No. 2005-1605
Application No. 10/295,072
established that one of ordinary skill in the art might
desire an adhesive that contains inorganic fibers as an end
product, however, appellants assert that the examiner has
failed to establish that it would have been obvious to have
incorporated inorganic fibers in each of the process steps
of Moon. We are not convinced by this argument for the
following reasons.
As pointed by the examiner, beginning on page 6 of the
answer, Moon teaches to incorporate fibers in each of the
process steps. Moon does not indicate the type of fibers.
The examiner relies upon Donermeyer (or Röber) for teaching
that inorganic fibers (glass fibers) are conventionally
used in hot melt coating compositions.2 Answer, pages 4-5.
The examiner finds that the use of glass fibers enhance the
physical properties of the coating material. Answer, pages
3-5.
Beginning on page 8 of the brief, appellants argue
that the combination of the process steps of Moon with the
glass fibers of Donermeyer is contrary to the express
teachings of the prior art. Appellants refer to the
reference of Vernon, and state that Vernon “explicitly
discusses an attempt to use inorganic fibers in these
process steps.” Appellants assert that Vernon teaches that
if inorganic glass monofilaments of a similar size are
mixed into a coatable solvent free syrup at a similar
concentration, then the coating operation cannot be
conducted because the long and relatively stiff glass
2 On page 9 of the answer, the examiner states that Röber is cited for
“its showing of the conventionality of incorporating glass fibers into
an adhesive coating in order to provide reinforcement of the coating.”
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007