Appeal 2006-3339
Application 10/869,805
been seen by the skilled artisan to apply to Deitz's shields for the
individually twisted pairs, Gareis's conclusion is not convincing.
Appellant further argues (Br. 9) that Dembiak does not discuss
impedance stability or resistance to deformation. Appellant again relies
upon Gareis, who states (Declaration, page 3) that
The teachings concerning Dietz's [sic] overall shield and its
ability to reduce slippage or prevent water penetration does not
suggest that bonding Dietz's [sic] individual shields could
prevent deformation and reduce impedance instability.
11. One would not expect, in view of Dembiak's
teachings that a bonded overall shield reduces slippage and
prevents water seepage, that bonding individual shields shown
in Dietz [sic] would reduce deformation and increase
impedance stability.
Gareis concludes that reduced deformation and increased impedance
stability are unexpected results.
Again we find Gareis's conclusions to be unpersuasive. First,
Dembiak discloses (col. 3, ll. 25-27) that "[t]he use of a shielding layer with
a sealed seam also has been shown to have higher strength characteristics
necessary to withstand repetitious bending of the cable." Thus, Dembiak
suggests that a sealed seam will prevent deformation. Further, as noted
supra, one of Dembiak's goals is to prevent wrinkling or rupture of the
shielding strip. Appellant discloses (Specification, page 2) that the
impedance of an ISTP is
influenced by the presence of the shield wrapped around its
circumference. Present day shields can suffer from variations
in geometry. Very small variations in the geometry and spacing
of the overall shield can drastically affect the cable's
impedance. The shield, commonly made of a thin metallic foil,
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013