Appeal 2006-3161
Application 10/687,228
1 Claim 10 under appeal reads as follows:
2 10. A garment to be worn by a human being
3 comprising:
4
5 a front portion and a rear portion;
6
7 a pair of arms being joined to said front and rear portions;
8
9 each of said arms having an outer elbow portion formed
10 from a stretch fabric material and other portions formed
11 from a non-stretch fabric material; and
12
13 underarm portions formed from a stretch fabric material.
14
15 The Examiner rejected claims 10 to 19 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
16 paragraph, because the specification does not reasonably provide enablement
17 for defining a non-stretch fabric material.
18 The Examiner rejected claims 10 to 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
19 being anticipated by Kratz.
20 The Examiner rejected claims 14 to 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
21 being unpatentable over Kratz in view of Blauer.
22 The Examiner rejected claims 17 to 19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
23 being unpatentable over Kratz in view of Lipson.
24 The prior art relied upon by the Examiner in rejecting the claims on
25 appeal is:
26 Lipson US 2,002,955 May 28, 1935
27 Kratz US 4,722,099 Feb. 2, 1988
28 Blauer US 5,593,754 Jan. 14, 1997
29
30 Appellant contends that the Examiner has not made out a case of non-
31 enablement because the Examiner has not established or averred that the
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013