Appeal No. 2000-2185 Page 11
Application No. 08/834,777
indicate that the hook material “lightly attaches” to the
topsheet 21. In any event, as
stated in In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934,
1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990):
The law is replete with cases in which the
difference between the claimed invention and the
prior art is some range or other variable within the
claims. . . . These cases have consistently held
that in such a situation, the applicant must show
that the particular range is critical, generally by
showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected
results relative to the prior art range [citations
omitted].
In the present case, however, appellants have not even
alleged, must less established, that the claimed peel strength
produces unexpected results. In this regard, we note page 17
of appellants’ specification, which states merely that “it is
desirable that the stemlike projections 48 of the hook
material 40 be releasably engaged with the disposable diaper
to provide a peel strength of at least about 20 grams,
desirably from about 20 to about 1500 grams and more desirably
from about 30 to about 90 grams.” Therefore, we are of the
opinion that the recited peel strength of at least about 20
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007