Appeal No. 2006-0737
Reexamination Control No. 90/005,944
Reexamination of U.S. Patent No. 4,847,448
can consider anything in a reference. See In re Azorlosa, 44 CCPA
826, 241 F.2d 939, 941, 113 USPQ 156, 158 (1957), which holds, in
pertinent part, that it is proper for the court and necessarily,
the board, to consider everything that a reference discloses. See
also In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1264, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1782 (Fed.
Cir. 1992) which states that a prior art reference is relevant for
all that it teaches to those of ordinary skill in the art. Leef
provides ample motivation to make the combination claimed in
claims 1 and 7, from which these rejected claims depend.
Leef describes flexible coaxial cables (page 1, line 4) Leef
describes wrapping a metallized tape about the insulating
structure of the core. (Page 3, lines 4-5.) That tape is a
metallized tape of a polymeric base material. (Page 3, lines 9-
10.) The polymeric material may be a polyester resin base film
such as Mylar ® (Page 4, lines 5-6) or polytetrafluoroethylene
film (Page 4, lines 39-40). Silver, copper, aluminum, and other
good conductors may be used. (Page 3, lines 21-23.)
Various methods are described for obtaining the metallized
films on the plastic material, including evaporative techniques,
chemical deposition, and electrophoretic coating. (Page 4, last 5
lines.) These tapes are said to be “particularly suitable” and
have “highly adherent” coatings (Page 4, lines 35 and 37). Leef,
13
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007