Appeal No. 2006-0494 Παγε 7
Application No. 10/285,801
In light of the above, we are not persuaded by appellants’
contentions suggesting that the examiner employed impermissible
hindsight in combining Masson and Pyke. In particular,
appellants (brief, page 6) contend that the examiner’s stated
combination of Masson and Pyke “is utterly devoid of support by
the applied references and therefore is conjectural at best.”
Moreover, appellants assert that “Pyke does not teach or suggest
to one skilled in the art that such a composition may be used
specifically in a support ring” (brief, pages 6 and 7). However,
as stated above and in the answer, Masson clearly teaches the use
of a composition including a natural rubber and a synthetic
elastomer, such as a polybutadiene, together with filler material
for making tread supporting ring, as claimed. Moreover, Masson
teaches that stiffness and reduced mass are desired properties.
Pyke suggests that nylon grafted dienes, such as polybutadiene,
have increased stiffness properties without sacrificing other
desirable characteristics of the rubber while reducing the need
for large amounts of fillers. See, e.g., column 1, line 5
through column 2, line 19 of Pyke. Thus, there is ample support
in Pyke and Masson to suggest the proposed combination of the
examiner with a reasonable expectation of success in so doing.
In addition, appellants comments concerning Pyke, as if applied
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007