Appeal No. 97-0774
Application 08/121,525
instead is merely relying upon Schoenholz’s description of the
Graham patent in column 1, lines 23-35, of the Schoenholz
specification. Admittedly, Schoenholz states in column 1, lines2
33-35, that Graham’s string for the tampon absorbent discs simply
functions to align the individual components so that a
“lengthwise movement would be optimized.” However, it does not
necessarily follow from this description that Graham’s discs are
necessarily slidably mounted on the string as urged by the
examiner on page 5 of the answer.
Instead, the lengthwise movement mentioned in lines 33-35 of
column 1 of the Schoenholz specification refers to lengthwise
expansion of the tampon discs as described in the preceding
sentence of the specification. As evidenced from the description
of the Schoenholz invention itself, it is not necessary to
slidably mount the tampon discs on the string or thread in order
to facilitate such an expansion of the discs upon absorbing body
fluids.
With particular regard to claim 26, the recitation of a
surgical nasal pack does not appear in just the preamble itself
as the examiner seems to suggest in the paragraph bridging pages
2 We hasten to add that reliance on the Graham patent itself, rather
than Schoenholz’s description of the Graham patent, would clearly be improper
in the present case because the Graham patent was not included in the
statement of the rejection. See In re Hoch, 428 F.2d 1341, 1342, 166 USPQ
406, 407 (CCPA 1970).
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007