Appeal 2007-0291
Application 09/976,412
Applying this legal principle to the factual findings on the record in
this appeal, we determine that Rockwell is analogous art. Therefore, we
determine that the Examiner has established a prima facie case of
obviousness in view of the reference evidence, which case has not been
adequately rebutted by Appellants’ arguments.
Appellants disclose that the technical field of their invention is the
manufacturing of fabric wipers (Specification 1:3). Appellants also disclose
that it has been recognized that, during use, the edges of the wiper may give
rise to a disproportionately high level of particulate generation (Specification
6:16-17). Appellants acknowledge that it was known to alleviate this
problem by fusing the borders of the wipers just along the edge or in a
substantially solid fusion zone extending a distance inwardly from the edge
(Specification 6:20-23). Appellants thus recognize the problem that such
borders may cause, namely the tendency to reduce the elasticity in these
areas relative to the rest of the wiper, with the resultant release of potentially
undesired particulates (Specification 7:1-5). Appellants solve this problem
by the use of discontinuous fused borders (Specification 10:5-10).
Therefore, we determine that Rockwell satisfies both prongs of the test for
analogous art. First, we determine that Rockwell is directed to the same
general field as Appellants’ endeavor, namely the manufacturing of fabric
towels or wipers for removing undesired material from an unclean surface.
Even assuming arguendo that Rockwell may be considered to be directed to
a different field of endeavor than Appellants, we determine that Rockwell is
“reasonably pertinent” to the particular problem faced by Appellants,
namely formation of a discontinuous pattern of bonding the edge of a fabric
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013