Interference 103,685
35 U.S.C. §§ 102/103 over the full disclosure of Riggins and
Hansen, U.S. 4,898,596, issued January 9, 1989. The subject
matter of Riggins’ product claims designated as corresponding to
Count 2 was determined also to be prima facie unpatentable for
double patenting of the subject matter defined by claims of
Riggins and Hansen, U.S. 4,898,596, issued January 9, 1989 (Paper
No. 83, pp. 63-64). The prima facie case for unpatentability of
the parties’ product claims over the references cited was
expressed as follows (Paper No. 83, pp. 70-71):
“[P]roduct” claims involved in this interference . . .
are directed to what would appear to be dyed fibers or
fabrics. Dyed fibers and fabrics, however, are known
in the prior art. Hence, the dyed fibers and fabrics
claimed by the parties would seem to be at least prima
facie unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102/103 under
the principles announced in binding precedent, such
as In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 15 USPQ2d 1655 (Fed. Cir.
1990); In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 227 USPQ 964 (Fed.
Cir. 1985); and In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 195 USPQ 430
(CCPA 1977).
Supported by the specification of Riggins’ patent, Claim 64
of Riggins’ patent reads (HX 1, col. 14, l. 61-67):
64. Poly(m-phenyleneisophthalamide) fibers or
fabric having 10% to 120% by weight of an aliphatic
amide having 7 to 14 carbon atoms capable of increasing
the swelling ratio at least 1.5% and excluding N-octyl-
2-pyrrolidone and N-cyclohexyl-2-pyrrolidone to make
the fibers or fabric receptive to dyeing, printing or
flame retardant treating.
Supported by substantially the same disclosure, Claims 79 and 81
of Riggins’ involved application designated as corresponding to
-26-
Page: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007