1995-2802 Application No. 07/983,002 explained why the fiber shapes in Masuda closest to the claimed shapes (see Figure 5 of Masuda and appellants’ Figures 1-3) are “two other cross-sectional fiber shapes with which difficulty is encountered in accordance with this invention.” (Column 2, lines 44-46). For the foregoing reasons, we determine that the examiner has failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness in view of the reference evidence of Masuda, Sato, Belitsin, Reinehr and Yoshimoto. The citation of Largman to show it is known in the art to form wicking thermoplastic fibers with bicomponent filaments (Answer, sentence bridging pages 5-6) does not remedy the deficiencies in the evidence noted above. Accordingly, the rejection of claims 1-7 and 9 under § 103 over Masuda in view of Sato, Belitsin, Reinehr, or Yoshimoto is reversed. Similarly the rejection of claims 8 and 10-12 under § 103 over the references as applied above further in view of Largman is reversed. The decision of the examiner is reversed. REVERSED ) EDWARD C. KIMLIN ) 10Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007