Appeal 2007-1022
Application 10/778,414
over Geisel, alone, or in combination with other pertinent prior art. The
Examiner should consider the obviousness of forming a webbing comprising
a mixture of Geisel’s phosphorescent synthetic yarns and other known
synthetic yarns that are not treated to be phosphorescent. Since Appellant
acknowledges that it was known in the art that conventional synthetic yarns
lose their strength upon exposure to ultraviolet light at a known rate, and it
was known that phosphorescent material loses its glow over time due to
exposure to ultraviolet light, the Examiner should consider the obviousness
of correlating these two known rates of loss. Also, if the Examiner
determines that it would have been obvious to intermingle the
phosphorescent fibers of Geisel with non-phosphorescent conventional
fibers to form a web, the question arises whether doing so would inherently
result in a webbing wherein the diminished glow of the phosphorescent
fibers correlates to the loss of strength of the non-phosphorescent fibers to
the non-specified degree claimed. We note that the appealed claims do not
require that the glow disappear when the fabric reaches a specific, unsafe
point of weakness, or any particular degree of weakness.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, the Examiner’s decision
rejecting the appealed claims is reversed. Also, the application is remanded
to the Examiner for consideration of a rejection of the appealed claims under
35 U.S.C. § 103.
This remand to the examiner pursuant to 37 CFR § 41.50(a)(1)
(effective September 13, 2004, 69 Fed. Reg. 49960 (August 12, 2004),
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013