Appeal No. 2000-0287 Page 2
Application No. 08/663,300
1998 (Paper No. 10) was not entered. Any future references to "the substitute specification" in
this decision will refer to the February 5, 1999 substitute specification which has been entered.
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention relates to a stretch activated elastic composite (claims 1-16 and
19) and a disposable absorbent garment comprising such a composite (claims 17 and 18). An
understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 1, which
appears in the appendix to the appellant's brief.1
The following rejections stand before us for review.
(1) Claims 1-19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as containing
subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one
skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or
use the invention.
(2) Claims 13-15, 17 and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, as
containing subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to
1The copies of claims 13 and 17 appearing in the appendix to the appellant's brief are inaccurate
reproductions of the claims of record, in that they incorporate the amendments thereto (claim 13, line 9; claim 17,
line 16) which have not been entered by the examiner. These claims (claim 13, line 9; claim 17, line 16) actually
read "a stress of lower than 100 g [not 1000 g] at 30% stretch."
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007