Appeal 2007-1486
Application 10/339,003
Therefore, we conclude that it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art to use Isoda's thermoplastic elastomeric net material
as a scrim in a conventional upholstery composite fabric as described by
Bafford because Isoda expressly describes the elastomeric net material as
providing superior durability, cushioning and heat-resistance durability.
KSR, 125 S.Ct. at 1739, 82 USPQ2d at 1395, ("The combination of familiar
elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does
nothing more than yield predictable results."); In re Kerkhoven, 626 F.2d
846, 850, 205 USPQ 1069, 1072 (CCPA 1980) ("It is prima facie obvious to
combine two compositions each of which is taught by the prior art to be
useful for the same purpose, in order to form a third composition which is to
be used for the very same purpose.").
Appellant does not allege any unexpected benefit or performance
arising from the claimed composition.
Based on the foregoing, we will sustain the rejection of claims 1, 2
and 4-10 under § 103(a) as obvious over Bafford in view of Isoda; and, of
claim 3 under § 103(a) as obvious over Bafford in view of Isoda, as applied
to claim 1, and further in view of Smith.
III. Conclusion
In summary, the decision of the Examiner (i) to reject claims 1, 2 and
4-10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Bafford in view of Isoda
is affirmed; and, (ii) to reject claim 3 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Bafford in view of Isoda, as applied to claim 1, and
further in view of Smith is affirmed.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013