Appeal No. 96-1415
Application No. 08/088,625
in the examiner’s answer. As a result, we conclude that none
of the rejections will be sustained, but that some of the
appealed claims should be rejected pursuant to 37 CFR
1.196(b). Our reasons for these conclusions are discussed
under separate headings below.
Rejection (1)
In explaining this rejection, the examiner stated that he
considered the dressing component [sic: bottom of the contact
component 12] of Gilman ‘362 to be “continuously planar,” as
claimed, notwithstanding the presence of one or more holes 22
therein, but alternatively, that it would have been obvious to
utilize instead a permeable material such as disclosed by
Sims’ barrier 20. In response to appellants’ argument that
Gilman’s dressing component and contact component are not
“releasably attached directly to each other,” as recited in
claims 1, 43 and 54, the examiner noted Gilman’s Figs. 7 and
10 to 12, in which dressing component 44 is directly attached
to contact component 12 (Fig. 7) or absorbent layer 76 is
releasably secured over vent sheet 68 (Figs. 10 to 12).
Appellants argue in their reply brief that neither of these
embodiments teaches a releasable, direct attachment.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007