Appeal 2007-0098
Application 10/169,909
Thus, the dispositive question is whether one of ordinary skill in the
art would have been led to employ the admittedly advantageous method
taught by Schikowski, together with the subsequent hydrodynamic needling
(hydroentangling) method, to produce a further strengthened multi-layered
nonwoven fabric within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 103. For the factual
findings set forth in the Answer and supra, we answer this question in the
affirmative.
V. CONCLUSION
On this record, we determine that the preponderance of evidence
weighs most heavily in favor of obviousness within the meaning of 35
U.S.C. § 103(a).
VI. ORDER
The Examiner’s decision rejecting the claims on appeal under 35
U.S.C. §103(a) is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv) (2007).
AFFIRMED
hh
ANTONELLI, TERRY, STOUT & KRAUS, LLP
1300 NORTH SEVENTEENTH STREET
SUITE 1800
ARLINGTON, VA 22209-3873
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Last modified: September 9, 2013