Appeal No. 2006-0369 Παγε 15
Application No. 10/225,395
would be discouraged from following the path set out in
the reference, or would be led in a direction divergent
from the path that was taken by the applicant.
Here, we agree with the examiner that Urban provides facts
which support the examiner’s obviousness contention regarding the
proposed modification thereof in view of Valaitis as outlined in
the answer and above. Certainly, Urban does not serve as a
teaching away from the examiner’s proposed modification thereof
based on the teachings of Valaitis, as urged in the brief. In
this regard, we find no discouragement with respect to using
cross-linking agents, such as the peroxides of Valaitis, together
with the EPDM of Urban for the radiation curing thereof based on
Urban’s object of reducing costs by eliminating the need for
curing under heat and pressure with peroxide. That potential
disadvantage of using heat and pressure curing discussed in Urban
is primarily concerned with eliminating the need for using a high
pressure press for the curing, not eliminating the use of an
optional peroxide cross-linking agent. See column 1, lines 39-41
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007