Appeal No. 2026-0818
Application No. 10/175,064
resistance recited in the appellants’ claims (brief, page 6).
Jenkins’ disclosure that the dyeing produces fibers having
improved ozone resistance (col. 1, lines 11-13) indicates that
Lin’s fibers, when dyed according to Jenkins’ teaching, would
have improved ozone resistance. Because Lin and Jenkins use,
respectively, the appellants’ sheath/core fibers and dyes, the
particular degree of ozone resistance observed by the appellants
would have been obtainable by one of ordinary skill in the art
from the disclosures of Lin and Jenkins through no more than
routine experimentation.
The appellants argue that one of ordinary skill in the art
would have expected that the improved ozone resistance of
Jenkins’ cationic dyeable nylon fibers would be obtained using
only the fibers disclosed by Jenkins (brief, page 6). The
appellants do not provide evidence that none of the fibers
disclosed by Jenkins according to their trade names is nylon 6,12
homopolymer. Regardless, Jenkins’ disclosure pertains to acid
dyeing nylon fibers in general, including Lin’s sheath/core nylon
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007