Appeal 2006-2269
Application 10/051,938
Funkhouser demonstrates that the claimed shock absorber structure is
conventional in the art. The Examiner concluded that it would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made
to combine “the fluid disclosed by Duncan . . . with a shock absorber as
taught by Funkhouser as an obvious implementation of the fluid which
addresses environmental concerns with regards to leaking shock absorbers”
(Answer 4).
Appellant argues that the “C810” acid disclosed by Duncan is a linear
carboxylic acid mixture composed of n-C8 and n-C10 acids with minor
amounts of n-C6 and n-C12 acids present (Br. 10). Appellant further argues
that Duncan does not contain any teaching that “C810” has a mixture as
claimed or that it is used as a dampening fluid (Br. 10).
Appellant also argues that Duncan provides no indication of any
beneficial result (i.e., better dampening capabilities or improved
biodegradability) from including a C6 acid in the “C810” composition
(Br. 10-11). In this regard, Appellant further argues that Duncan does not
disclose a dampening fluid having a C6 acid (Br. 10). Appellant contends
that, given Duncan’s focus on mixing linear and branched acids, there would
be no motivation or reasonable expectation of success in forming a mixture
as claimed by Appellant (Br. 11).
The Examiner responds that Duncan’s Table 8 discloses that the
“TPE/C810/Ck8” is a polyol ester which contain a hindered polyol
(i.e., pentaerthitol) and a carboxylic acid (i.e., C810) (Answer 5). The
Examiner indicates that both Table 1 and 2 and column 20, lines 44-50 of
Duncan disclose that “C810” contains C6 and C8 acids (Answer 5). The
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013