Appeal 2006-2455
Application 10/142,533
described process. (Col. 2, ll. 33-34 and Col. 6, l. 16). The Examiner
concludes that it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the
art to needle-punch the fibrous fabric of Steuber. (Answer 3).
Appellants argue Dempsey's example employs the consolidated sheets
of Steuber that have been cohesively bonded and not the contact bonded
sheets. Appellants' arguments are not persuasive. Example IV of Steuber
describes various contact bonded sheets and provides a Table (III) which
describes the properties of various contact bonded sheets. A person of
ordinary skill in the art would have readily understood that the use of
needle-punching on the various consolidated sheets described in Steuber
would provide porosity therein.
Appellants argue that a person of ordinary skill in the art would not
have been motivated to needle-punch the contact bonded sheets of Steuber
because of their known porosity, (Br. 4). Appellants' arguments are not
persuasive. Steuber not only discloses the sheets are suitable for use as
filters, Steuber discloses that the sheets can be after treated for a variety of
different uses. (See col. 7, l. 72 to col. 8, l. 22). Consequently, a person of
ordinary skill in the art who desires to have a more porous sheet would have
been suitably motivated to needle-punch the sheet described by Steuber.
Based on our consideration of the totality of the record before us
having evaluated the prima facie case in view of Appellants' arguments, we
determine that the Examiner has established a prima facie case of
obviousness that has not been adequately rebutted by Appellants.
Accordingly, the Examiner's rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007