Appeal No. 1998-2818
Application 08/550,521
rejection of claim 1 further in view of Buell have been
considered. Our views with respect to the majority of these
arguments should be clear from our discussion above. In
addition, we do not agree with appellant that the ordinarily
skilled artisan would not turn to Buell’s flat-type diaper for
a suggestion to modify the pull-on type diapers of Uni-Charm
and/or Kao. In particular, Buell’s reference at column 34,
lines 23-47, to the side panels of a particular prior art
pull-on diaper as an example of the type of side panels that
may be utilized in Buell shows a recognition of the fact that,
generally speaking, features of pull-on diapers may be
incorporated into flat-type diapers, and vice versa.3
We will also sustain the examiner’s rejection of claim 9
as being unpatentable over Uni-Charm or Kao in view of Buell.
Claim 9 additionally calls for the absorbent core of the body
to be rectangular. To provide an absorbent core of various
3 U.S. Patent 4,938,753 to Van Gumpel, mentioned in Buell
at column 34, lines 47-58, and in particular the Figure 5A
embodiment thereof, would appear to be closer to the claimed
subject matter of the present application than either Uni-
Charm, Kao, or Buell. In the event of further prosecution,
the examiner may wish to consider the patentability of the
claims in light of this prior art reference.
16
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007