Appeal No. 1999-0441
Application No. 08/676,454
written description contained in appellant’s specification.
In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027 (Fed.
Cir. 1997). In the present instance, we are in accord with
appellant that one of ordinary skill in the art would not have
viewed the folded over portions 4-6 of Pigneul, which are
bonded to the cover layer at only two discrete gluing points 8
between the ends 6, as being bonded to the cover layer
along each respective longitudinal edge of said main
body with the exception of at least a portion of a
line of intersection between each tab and said main
body remaining unbonded to form a pocket adjacent to
each tab which is capable of collecting body
exudate,
as called for in claim 1, or as called for in similar language
found in independent claims 10 and 18. This is especially so
when this claim language is read within the context of the
underlying disclosure, which informs the artisan that the
folded over portions are bonded to the edges of the main body
with either discrete or continuous elongated thermal bonds 18
“which run from points near the end corners of the body 2 to
points where the tabs 3” (specification, page 8). Given the
generally accepted dictionary definition of “along” (i.e.,
“over the length of”) posited by appellant on page 5 of the
Reply Brief, and the enlightenment afforded by appellant’s
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007