Appeal 2007-0784
Application 10/304,239
(Reply Br. 5). The Appellants’ argument is unpersuasive.
This is because the Specification explicitly teaches that:
[T]he securement path 63 is also considered to be crooked if
either a centerline C extending centrally between the edge
boundaries A, B and/or either one of the edge boundaries A, B
of a portion of the securement path 63 is arcuate, bent or
otherwise oblique or non-parallel relative to a particular axis,
such as the longitudinal axis X of the pants 21.
(Specification 15:11-17). In accordance with this definition, a securement
path is crooked if any portion of its centerline C or either one of its edge
boundaries A, B is “arcuate, bent or otherwise oblique or non-parallel
relative to a particular axis” (id.). When worn, the centerline as well as each
of the edge boundaries of Mishima’s adhesive 23 are unquestionably arcuate
or bent in correspondence to the waist shape of the user relative to the
transverse axis shown in Patentee’s figure 3 in a non-use disposition. The
contrary view expressed by Appellants on page 5 of the Reply Brief is based
on an unsupported definition of the claim 46 phrase “crooked securement
path” which is contrary to the above-quoted definition from Specification
page 15.
Accordingly, we will sustain the Examiner’s § 102 rejection of claims
46 and 48 as being anticipated by Mishima.
CONCLUSION
The decision of the Examiner is affirmed-in-part.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013