10736117 (B.P.A.I. Aug. 16, 2011)

Ex Parte Brandel et al

Board of Patent Appeals and InterferencesAug 16, 2011

10736117 (B.P.A.I. Aug. 16, 2011)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ________________ BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS AND INTERFERENCES ________________ Ex parte LENNART J. BRANDEL, PER-OLOF GEORG ALGOTSSON, KRISTER DRAXO, FRANK JOHANSSON, MICHAELA KLAUS and ANDREJ KALINAY ________________ Appeal 2010-006087 Application 10/736,117 Technology Center 1700 ________________ Before TERRY J. OWENS, PETER F. KRATZ, and LINDA M. GAUDETTE, Administrative Patent Judges. OWENS, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE The Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 11. Claims 12-15, 19 and 21, which are all of the other pending claims, stand withdrawn from consideration by the Examiner. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). Appeal 2010-006087 Application 10/736,117 2 The Invention The Appellants claim a woven, patterned glass fiber textile fabric. Claim 1 is illustrative: 1. A woven, patterned glass fiber textile fabric comprised of a glass fiber yarn with a titer of from about 30 to 75 tex as the warp, and a glass fiber yarn having a titer ranging from190 to 350 tex as the weft, wherein the warp density of the fabric ranges from 2.5 to 5 threads/cm and the weft density ranges from 2.0 to 12 threads/cm, wherein the woven, patterned glass fiber textile fabric is formed from a Jacquard weaving process using a Jacquard loom, wherein each glass fiber yarn used as the warp and/or weft is a sliver or a texturized yarn. The References Land 5,433,997 Jul. 18, 1995 Draxö EP 1 162 306 A2 Dec. 12, 2001 The Rejection Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Draxö in view of Land. OPINION We affirm the rejection. The Appellants argue the claims as a group (Br. 2-6). We therefore limit our discussion to one claim, i.e., claim 1, which is the sole independent claim. The other claims stand or fall with that claim. See 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii) (2007). Claim 1 requires a woven, patterned glass fiber textile fabric which is formed by a Jacquard weaving process and comprises a glass fiber yarn having specified warp and weft titers and densities. Appeal 2010-006087 Application 10/736,117 3 Draxö discloses a glass fiber wallcovering comprising glass fiber yarns having, in a preferred embodiment, warp fibers with a titer of 139 to 142 tex and approximately 315 to 340 ends per meter and weft fibers with a titer of 165 to 550 tex and approximately 170 to 600 ends per meter (¶¶ 0009, 0017-18). In another embodiment the glass fiber yarn has warp fibers with a titer of 34 to 68 tex and approximately 680 ends per meter and weft fibers with a titer of 165 to 550 tex and approximately 170 to 600 ends per meter (¶¶ 0017-18). Land discloses a glass fiber wallcovering comprising glass yarns which preferably are texturized and can be woven into various styles, one of which is Jacquard (col. 2, l. 55; col. 4, ll. 14-15; col. 5, ll. 34-37). The Appellants argue that the Examiner appears to be picking and choosing Draxö’s glass fiber yarn and Land’s Jacquard weaving process and loom to arrive at the Appellants’ patterned glass fiber textile fabric, and that such picking and choosing is improper because Land’s glass fiber yarn warp density which, according to the Appellants, is 6.7 to 13.4 threads/cm, differs from those of Draxö and the Appellants (Br. 4-5). The Appellants argue that because of the difference in the glass fiber yarn warp densities of Draxö and Land, the result of combining Draxö and Land would not have been predictable (Br. 5). The Appellants do not provide evidence or technical reasoning in support of their argument that the difference in the glass fiber yarn warp densities of Draxö (3.15 to 6.80 threads/cm, ¶ 0017) and Land (6.7 to 13.4 threads/cm, as argued by the Appellants, Br. 4), both of which are within the Appellants’ range of 2.5 to 20 threads/cm (Spec. 2:30 – 3:1), would have rendered the result of weaving Draxö’s yarn using Land’s Appeal 2010-006087 Application 10/736,117 4 Jacquard process unpredictable. The result of using Land’s Jacquard process to weave Draxö’s glass fiber yarn having a warp density of 6.80 threads/cm clearly would have been predictable because that warp density is within Land’s warp density range. One of ordinary skill in the art, therefore, would have had a reasonable expectation of success in applying Land’s Jacquard process to Draxö’s glass fiber yarn. Hence, the use of Land’s Jacquard process for weaving Draxö’s glass fiber yarns would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re O’Farrell, 853 F.2d 894, 903-04 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (“Obviousness does not require absolute predictability of success …. For obviousness under § 103, all that is required is a reasonable expectation of success”). DECISION/ORDER The rejection of claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 11 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Draxö in view of Land is affirmed. It is ordered that the Examiner’s decision is affirmed. No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). AFFIRMED tc