Appeal No. 95-2533
Application No. 08/018,125
of ordinary skill in this art to substitute in Ashton
for his obturator A the liquid-filled obturator of
French patent in order to achieve the French patent's
expressly stated advantage of providing an obturator
which closely conforms to the barrel while at the same
time providing "a perfect obturation."
We find ourselves in agreement with the above-noted findings and
conclusion of the examiner and adopt them as our own.
The appellant argues that the flexible barrier of the French
patent is made of felt-covered white wool and thus cannot be
considered to be “non-porous” with respect to the fluid contained
therein as required by the claims on appeal. In support of this
position the reply brief on page 2 states that:
The French patent never describes or refers to the wad
(B’) as being “non-porous” with respect to the moldable
core (a). The Examiner’s use of the term “non-porous”
to characterize the wad (B’) is therefore not
substantiated, and is hereby challenged.
We do not find this contention to be persuasive. Initially,
we observe that the French patent does not simply disclose felt-
covered white wool as a material for the flexible barrier as the
appellant would apparently have us believe. Instead, the French
patent discloses that the flexible barrier may be “made of felt-
covered white wool that has been greased around its periphery”
(see the sentence bridging pages 4 and 5 of the translation;
emphasis ours). Moreover, while independent claims 1 and 12 each
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007