Appeal No. 2005-0927 Page 3
Application No. 09/954,788
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the answer
for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections and to the brief for
the appellants’ arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellants’ specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner. For the reasons
which follow, we cannot sustain the rejections.
Hutchinson discloses protective gloves for electricians capable of providing
protection under test voltages of at least 5000 volts, each glove comprising an exterior
layer made of a synthetic elastomer such as rubber, a middle layer of a synthetic
elastomer having extensive dielectric properties and an internal layer of natural or
synthetic textile fibers applied by flocking on the surface of the median layer.
Hutchinson does not disclose a lining of flock which diminishes from the bases of the
finger sheaths to be substantially absent at the fingertip portions as called for in
independent claims 1 and 8. Rather, as illustrated in Figure 1, the fiber flock layer 5 of
Hutchinson extends substantially uniformly over the palm, back hand and finger sheath
portions of the glove.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007