Appeal No. 2006-0772
Application No. 09/731,945
bagged in a mold, and infused with a resin. As recognized by the
examiner, Johnson does not disclose tackifying the preform with a
tackifier that contains a toughening agent, but Johnson does
teach the application of an adhesive to provide a tacky substance
on the preform. In addition, the examiner correctly points out
that both White and EP '438 disclose tackifying a fiber-
reinforced composite before molding, and EP '438 demonstrates
that it was known in the art to use a tackifying elastomer that
is also a toughening additive (see column 2, last paragraph).
Accordingly, we are satisfied that one of ordinary skill in the
art would have found it obvious to tackify the preform of Johnson
with a tackifier containing toughening agents.
The examiner also appreciates that Johnson does not
expressly teach a low modulus, high elongation nylon vacuum bag
that minimizes bag wrinkles. However, Shepherd establishes that
the use of such nylon films in vacuum bag molding processes was
known in the art. Accordingly, we find that it would have been
obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to employ the nylon
film of Shepherd in the vacuum bag molding process of Johnson.
We note that appellants acknowledge that they do "not claim to
have invented low modulus, high elongation vacuum bags" (page 9
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007