Appeal No. 96-1726
Application 08/146,498
a comfortable surface that readily transmits moisture vapor, is
highly water resistant and is comfortable for the wearer.
We, of course, fully appreciate the examiner’s point
of view as regards the asserted obviousness of the claimed sur-
gical gown. However, the basic difficulty that this panel of
the board has with the rejection of claims 1 and 7 is that the
selective modification of the surgical gown of Tames to yield
appellant’s claimed gown can only be accomplished on the basis
of the references when knowledge of appellant’s own invention is
relied upon, i.e., reliance upon impermissible hindsight.
Tames gives examples of the material for the front
panel (outer layer) 15, but otherwise the patentee gives no
instruction as to what qualities this layer should possess
relative to the underlying moisture-proof, electrically con-
ductive material of flexible sheet 20. On the other hand, the
outer gown layer of Holt is absorbent, while the outer gown layer
of Schwarze readily transmits moisture vapor and is highly water
resistant. But for appellant’s own teaching, we do not perceive
any clear suggestion from the combined teachings that would have
been derived by one of ordinary skill in the art to selectively
modify the front panel of the surgical gown of Tames by forming
it from a liquid repellant, moisture vapor transmitting material.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007