Ex Parte Ward - Page 7

                Appeal 2006-2290                                                                               
                Application 10/278,190                                                                         

                Examiner’s alterations would not “increase the comfort of wearing the                          
                mask” because the outer layer does not contact the skin, and there is no                       
                “evidence that changing the outer layer to an absorbent would improve                          
                breathability” or filtration (id. 2).  Appellant submits Siess’ system avoids                  
                the mask filtering contaminates by repelling the contaminants.                                 
                      The plain language of independent claim 9 specifies any method of                        
                protecting in any manner and to any extent, any manner of exposed surface                      
                from any undesired result to which that surface is exposed, by placing the                     
                bottom surface of any manner of sheet that is electrostatically charged to any                 
                extent, in contact to any extent with the surface to be protected, wherein the                 
                top surface of the electrostatically charged sheet is in contact to any extent                 
                with the bottom surface of any manner of absorbent layer.                                      
                      There is no limitation on the exposed surface or the result to be                        
                prevented by the protection to be provided.  Appellant describes, for                          
                example, the desire in the laboratory arts to protect the surface of a                         
                workbench from solvents which can damage the surface as well as flow                           
                therefrom onto any other surface (Specification 1:10-25).  There is also no                    
                limitation on any additional sheet or sheets in contact with the top surface of                
                the absorbent layer.  Appellant describes a layer covering the absorbent layer                 
                (Specification 2:18-19 and 28-30, 4:18-22, and Fig. 2).  The claim further                     
                does not require the electrostatically charged sheet to remain so for any                      
                particular period of time after placed in contact with the exposed surface.                    
                See Specification 3-4.  Cf. Exxon Chem. Pats., Inc. v. Lubrizol Corp., 64                      




                                                      7                                                        

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013