Appeal 2007-3258
Application 10/916,195
1 The Examiner found that Masson reveals that the tire industry has
2 looked to the packaging industry to find compositions having suitable
3 oxygen scavenging properties. Examiner's Answer, page 3.
4 Goodyear maintains that Masson does not support the Examiner's
5 finding. According to Goodyear, Masson makes no general connection
6 between the packaging art and oxygen scavenging materials for use in tires.
7 Appeal Brief, page 5.
8 We find it unnecessary to rely on Masson and therefore do not find it
9 necessary to resolve Goodyear's attack on the Examiner's finding.
10 Additional findings
11 In reviewing the specification, we found that Goodyear's reference to
12 U.S. Patent Publication 2004/0074123 should be 2004/0084123. In the
13 event of future prosecution, Goodyear may wish to amend the specification
14 to refer to the correct publication number.
15
16 E. Principles of law
17 A claimed invention is not patentable if the subject matter of the
18 claimed invention would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill
19 in the art. 35 U.S.C. § 103(a); KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct.
20 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007); Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1
21 (1966).
22 Facts relevant to a determination of obviousness include (1) the scope
23 and content of the prior art, (2) any differences between the claimed
24 invention and the prior art, (3) the level of skill in the art and (4) any
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013