Ex Parte Molas et al - Page 10


                Appeal No.  2007-0752                                                   Page 10                 
                Application No.  09/957,109                                                                     
                six (claims 8 and 17), eight (claims 9 and 18) or ten (claims 10 and 19) lines.                 
                       The examiner finds that Unger does not teach a pantiliner with at least                  
                four, six, eight or ten fold lines.  Answer, page 6.  To make up for this deficiency,           
                the examiner relies on Hines to “teach forming a W-shape in the central area and                
                a[n] inverted V shape in the rear end region but with at least 4, 6, 8, or 10 fold              
                lines.”  Answer, page 7.  From this evidence the examiner concludes that it would               
                be obvious “[t]o make the at least two fold lines which form the various shapes of              
                Unger at least 4, 6, 8 or 10 fold lines as taught by Hines. . . .”  Id.  According to           
                the examiner (id.), “the number of fold lines of Unger and Hines all function to                
                provide certain shapes.”                                                                        
                       The examiner does not discuss Everhart.  Nevertheless, we assume the                     
                examiner relies on Everhart to disclose a high pulp content nonwoven composite                  
                fabric that may be used as an absorbent as discussed above.                                     
                       As discussed above, Unger fails to teach or suggest a pantiliner as set                  
                forth in appellants’ claimed invention.  As further discussed above, Everhart fails             
                to make up for the deficiencies in Unger.  Therefore, we turn to Hines for a                    
                teaching of a pantiliner that may be adjusted in size depending on panty size, by               
                folding said pantiliner along at least one embossed fold line to allow the periphery            
                side areas of the pantiliner to be positioned under a panty prior to, and while in              
                use as required by appellants’ claimed invention.                                               
                       However, we find that Hines teaches a sanitary napkin which is                           
                constructed to form a W-shape when worn.  Specifically, Hines teaches a                         
                sanitary napkin which has lines of weakness which allow the sanitary napkin to                  






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

Last modified: September 9, 2013