Appeal No. 2000-1071 Page 2
Application No. 08/851,381
BACKGROUND
The appellants’ invention relates to a method of forming a tampon. An
understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 31, which
appears in the appendix to the appellants’ Brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Ganz 2,620,799 Dec. 9, 1952
Bletzinger et al. (Bletzinger) 2,926,394 Mar. 1, 1960
Cloots et al. (Cloots) 3,131,435 May 5, 1964
Wolff et al. (Wolff) 3,422,496 Jan. 21, 1969
Corrigan 3,595,236 Jul. 27, 1971
Claims 31 and 35-40 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Cloots in view of Corrigan.
Claims 31 and 35-40 also stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Cloots in view of Corrigan, Bletzinger, Ganz and Wolff.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the
appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the Answer (Paper
No. 18) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the Brief
(Paper No. 17) for the appellants’ arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007