1995-2802
Application No. 07/983,002
explained why the fiber shapes in Masuda closest to the
claimed shapes (see Figure 5 of Masuda and appellants’ Figures
1-3) are “two other cross-sectional fiber shapes with which
difficulty is encountered in accordance with this invention.”
(Column 2, lines 44-46).
For the foregoing reasons, we determine that the examiner
has failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness in
view of the reference evidence of Masuda, Sato, Belitsin,
Reinehr and Yoshimoto. The citation of Largman to show it is
known in the art to form wicking thermoplastic fibers with
bicomponent filaments (Answer, sentence bridging pages 5-6)
does not remedy the deficiencies in the evidence noted above.
Accordingly, the rejection of claims 1-7 and 9 under § 103
over Masuda in view of Sato, Belitsin, Reinehr, or Yoshimoto
is reversed. Similarly the rejection of claims 8 and 10-12
under § 103 over the references as applied above further in
view of Largman is reversed.
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
)
EDWARD C. KIMLIN )
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007