Appeal 2007-3182
Application 10/683,058
We have thoroughly reviewed each of Appellants' arguments for
patentability, as well as the Specification data relied upon in support thereof.
However, we are in complete agreement with the Examiner that the claimed
subject matter would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art
within the meaning of § 103 in view of the applied prior art. Accordingly,
we will sustain the Examiner's rejection for essentially those reasons
expressed in the Answer, and we add the following primarily for emphasis.
Helms, as explained by the Examiner, discloses multi-lobal carpet
filaments that may have a solid-cross section and a modification ratio
preferably within the claimed range. Helms discloses two cross-sectional
configurations for the tri-lobal filaments as simply examples of specific
shapes, but clearly teaches that a wide variety of different cross-sectional
geometries maybe produced by the disclosed invention (see Abstract). On
the other hand, there is no dispute that Boyle discloses yarn comprised of a
plurality of multi-lobal filaments having a cross-section and characteristics
in accordance with the claimed invention. Accordingly, although the
filaments of Boyle are hollow and not solid, as presently claimed, we are in
full agreement with the Examiner that one of ordinary skill in the art would
have found it obvious to adopt the cross-sectional configuration disclosed by
Boyle for the cross-sectional shape of Helms' filaments. As explained by the
Examiner, Boyle expressly discloses the following:
It has been determined that the composite curve profile or
multiple arm arrangement of the filament allows for an increase
in the modification ratio. By increasing the modification ratio,
a carpet made from the filaments has increased bulk and
reduced luster. (col. 6, ll. 59-63).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013