Appeal No. 2005-1710
Application No. 10/057,474
would occur with a pre-cured compression fitted elastomeric
member" (page 7 of principal brief, second paragraph). According
to appellants, "as the uncured elastomer is in a liquid state, it
has the ability to flow and subsequently cure in more intimate
contact with the phosphated surface" (id.). Appellants contend
that there would be no adhesion-promoting reaction between a
phosphate-coated metal surface and a pre-cured elastomer. In
response to appellants' argument, the examiner simply states
"one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references
individually where the rejections are based on combinations of
references . . . Kingsley is used solely for the teaching of the
increased bonding strength found when bonding an elastomer to a
phosphate coated metal surface" (paragraph bridging pages 3 and 4
of Answer). Hence, it can be seen that the examiner has not
addressed appellants' argument that one would not expect
increased bonding strength between a pre-cured elastomer and a
phosphate-coated metal surface.
Also, in response to appellants' declaration that
demonstrates unexpectedly improved heat aging for the claimed
elastomers vis-á-vis other elastomers, the examiner states
"[p]lease note that Kingsley teaches this feature in col. 6 lines
58-64 and column 8 lines 38-53" (page 3 of Answer, second
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007