Appeal No. 97-1192
Application 08/385,290
[column 1, lines 34 through 50].
Lyng goes on to describe five specific examples (Examples I-V)
of the laminate (see column 2, line 25 et seq.). The
description of Example I includes a discussion of the fabric
layer’s weave.
In support of the rejection of independent claim 1, the
examiner states that
Lyng discloses a crosslinked collagen fabric, which
constitutes the second layer as claimed, impregnated
with a collagen film which constitutes the first
layer as claimed, but Lyng fails to disclose the
size of the pores thereof of the two layers.
However, the Examiner asserts that the collagen film
must have pores smaller than about 1 micron since it
is semi-permeable and prevents microbes from passing
through it; see the whole document, especially Col.
1, lines 27-50, Col. 2, lines 8-17 and Example I.
Specifically, the Examiner reasons that, since the
film membrane is semi-permeable, it allows fluids
and small molecules therethrough. Furthermore,
since microbes [are] on the order of about 1 micron
in size, it seems reasonable to assume that the
pores of Lyng are in the range of less than about 1
micron in size.
With respect to the dimensions of the second
layer of Lyng, the examiner posits that the fabric
disclosed in Example I of Lyng would obviously
result in pores size and thickness in the claimed
range.
Hence, it is the Examiner’s position that the
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007