Appeal No. 2006-1546
Application No. 09/974,262
combined Otsuka with Yokota because the “reason(s) for the
central wide linear fracture section [i.e., “recess region” in
Otsuka] 23 and the side fracture sections [i.e., “breakage
parts” in Otsuka] 16b . . . are not present in Yokota’s cover,
i.e., it is not rectangular and does not include fracture
sections formed at the bases of downwardly extending side
walls.” (Brief, page 12). However, as the Examiner states in
his answer, the combination of Otsuka with Yokota is not based
on the shape of the Otsuka’s breakage parts (i.e., tear lines)
or Yokota’s tear lines, but on the express teaching of Otsuka
that adding “ribs” (i.e., ridges) to “breakage parts” (i.e.,
tear lines) enhances the rigidity thereof. (English Translation,
¶¶ [0013], [0015], [0017], [0050]; Answer, page 5).
Appellants argue that Otsuka’s breakage-part (i.e., tear
line) pattern is only meant for passenger-side airbag covers.
(Reply Brief, page 4). Appellants indicate that since Otsuka’s
breakage-part (i.e., tear line) pattern is wide and “H”-shaped
it is meant specifically for a rectangular passenger-side airbag
cover panel. (Reply brief, page 4). In view of Otsuka’s
teaching to use the disclosed panel for a passenger-side airbag
cover, Appellants conclude that Otsuka’s rectangular airbag
cover and breakage part pattern is “very distinct” from Yokota’s
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007