Appeal 2006-2137
Application 10/375,748
Examiner that the determination of optimum proportions of the above-
mentioned solid materials, such as those claimed, in the friction product
forming process of the type discussed in Parker is well within the ambit of
one of ordinary skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276, 205 USPQ
215, 219 (CCPA 1980)(“[D]iscovery of an optimum value of a result
effective variable in a known process is ordinarily within the skill of the
art.”).
The Appellant asserts (Br. 4) that:
It is the Appellant[']s position that optimization of the result-
effective variable was limited in the processes of Parker… as a
result of the dewatering processes used in their methods. One
skilled in the art could not simply change the quantities and
sizes of the various components to arrive at the present
invention due to the limitation in the dewatering step.
[Emphasis original.]
We are not persuaded by this assertion. First, the Appellant does not
refer to any objective evidence to support his assertion that the dewatering
step taught by Parker would direct one of ordinary skill in the art away from
the claimed proportions. In re De Blauwe, 736 F.2d 699, 705, 222 USPQ
191, 196 (Fed. Cir. 1984). Second, as indicated supra, Parker not only
specifically and inherently teaches the claimed sizes of solid fibers and
particles, but also teaches that the amounts of solid fibers and particles
employed can be varied to obtain friction products having desired
manufacturing characteristics and properties.
As to the claimed punch design, there is no dispute that MacMurray
teaches the claimed punch design which is used to dewater and compact a
slurry in a die cavity. Compare Answer 6, 10 and 11 with Br. 3-10 and
Reply Br. 1-5. Specifically, MacMurray teaches that its invention is directed
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007