Ex parte WIDLUND et al. - Page 7

          Appeal No. 1999-2678                                                        
          Application 08/704,705                                                      

          sheet and the absorbent body/member (or its casing) to define               
          a first pouch that opens at the first opening and a second                  
          pouch that opens at the second opening.  Barrochelo, taken                  
          alone or in any combination with Williams, Foreman and/or                   
          Huffman, does not teach and would not have suggested this                   
          structure.  In this regard, the examiner’s determination (see               
          page 3 in the final rejection and page 6 in the answer) that                
          Barrochelo’s fabric sheet 122 (see Figures 11 and 12)                       
          essentially corresponds to the flexible/tubular member recited              
          in claims 12, 24 and 28 is not well taken.  Fabric sheet 122                
          is connected to Barrochelo’s top sheet 60 and lateral flaps                 
          100 rather than to the top sheet and                                        

          absorbent body/member as claimed, and thus does not define the              
          particular pouch/opening construction required by claims 12,                
          24 and 28.                                                                  
               Thus, the references applied by the examiner do not                    
          justify a conclusion that the differences between the subject               
          matter recited in claims 12, 24 and 28, and in claims 13                    
          through 23, 25 through 27, 29 and 30 which depend therefrom,                


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007