Appeal No. 96-4158
Application No. 08/404,242
Claims 1 through 6, 8 through 19 and 27 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Blott in view
of Laufenberg. The examiner concedes that Blott’s liner 8 for
separating adjacent convolutions of the rolled, resin coated,
tubular casting structure in Figure 4 of the reference is not
soluble in water as required by the appealed claims. He
nevertheless contends:
However, Laufenberg et al teaches that it has been
known to use water soluble interliners in similar
rolled casting bandages; see Col. 1, lines 34-55;
Col. 2, lines 29-63; Col. 3, lines 10-33. Hence, it
is the Examiner’s position that it would have been
obvious to use a water soluble liner in the Blott
invention for the same reasons that Blott uses an
insoluble interliner; i.e. in order to prevent
contact and reaction between adjacent layers of the
roll. [Answer, pages 3-4]
In Laufenberg’s rolled orthopedic casting sheet of
thermoplastic material, a layer of release material is located
adjacent to casting sheet for a purpose corresponding to that
of appellants’ liner, namely to prevent attachment of adjacent
convolutions of the casting sheet in its rolled configuration.
Laufenberg teaches the art to form the release layer from a
water soluble material for the self-evident purpose of
eliminating the need to physically remove the release layer as
required with Blott’s insoluble liner.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007