Appeal No. 2006-1484
Application No. 09/828,480
and the decorative layer together to thermally bond the above
three layers prior to molding. See column 9, lines 25-53. By
teaching the employment of the same material, i.e.,
polypropylene, to form both the decorative and backing fabric
layers and the thermoplastic support layer, Stricker implicitly
teaches or would have suggested that all of these layers have the
same melting or decomposing temperatures.
Although Striker does not teach partially melting both the
decorative and backing fabric layers, we determine that claim 18
as a whole does not preclude the molded article of the type
described in Stricker. Specifically, we determine that the
phrase “a plurality of fabric layers, each fabric layer
comprising fiber of which a maximum of approximately 10 vol. %
have been melted” as used in claim 18 includes fabric layers
having no melted fibers (less than 10% by volume melted fibers),
such as those taught by Stricker. See, e.g., In re Mochel, 470
F.2d 638, 640, 176 USPQ 194, 195 (CCPA 1972). Thus, we concur
with the examiner that one of ordinary skill in the art would
have been led to arrive at the subject matter defined by claims
18 through 22 and 25 within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 103.
As to claims 23 and 24, we concur with the examiner that
Stricker, by virtue of teaching the employment of an “open-cell
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007