Ex parte SEIBERT et al. - Page 2




          Appeal No. 96-3720                                         Page 2           
          Application No. 08/230,825                                                  


          claims 1-4 as amended subsequent to the final rejection.  These             
          are all the claims remaining in the application.                            

               The subject matter on appeal relates to a material which               
          comprises two sheets of microporous plastic film bonded                     
          together with an adhesive, the plastic film having pores of a               
          sufficient size such that the adhesive migrates into the pores              
          forming a continuous layer between the two sheets of film.                  
          Further details of this appeal subject matter are set forth in              
          representative independent claim 1 which reads as follows:                  

               1.   A material for use in the manufacture of surgical                 
          gowns and the like and which comprises two sheets of                        
          microporous plastic film bonded together with an adhesive, the              
          plastic film having pores of a sufficient size such that the                
          adhesive migrates into pores forming a continuous layer between             
          the two sheets of film to provide a breathable but                          
          substantially liquid and viral impervious laminated core, and               
          two layers of fabric that cover and protect said core.                      
               The reference relied upon by the examiner as evidence of               
          obviousness is:                                                             

          Lumb et al. (Lumb)            5,204,156                Apr. 20,             
          1993                                                                        

               All of the claims on appeal stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.             
          § 103 as being unpatentable over Lumb.                                      







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007