Appeal No. 2006-2484 Παγε 9
Application No. 10/837,337
argued. Indeed, Smith discloses that the product sealing strip
disclosed therein can be used in other applications, including in
applications for vehicles designed for air uses (aerospace
application), as would be understood by one of ordinary skill in
the art. See column 15, lines 49-58 of Smith. Thus, Smith is
directed to substantially the same field of endeavor. In sum,
the record reflects that the teachings of Smith would have
logically commended themselves to one of ordinary skill in the
art seeking sealants in general, as well as sealants for
aerospace uses.3
Claims 28 and 29
Appellants argue these claims as a group. Thus, we select
claim 28 as representative of this claim grouping.
3
3 Appellants do not furnish any other separate arguments
pertaining to claim 24 or separate arguments pertaining to other
individual appealed claims among the claims in the grouping of
claims 1-27. See 37 CFR § 41.37(c)(1)(vii).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007