Appeal No. 1999-0822 9
Application No. 08/732,866
page 1, paragraph 6 of the Murray Declaration. The claimed subject matter however
does not contain a limitation directed to a rotary washing process. It requires only a
limitation that the “covering mat possesses suitable flexibility to be laundered by an
industrial washing machine.” A carpet steam cleaner meets that requirement. Stated
otherwise, appellant’s argument fails from the outset because it is not based upon
limitations appearing in the claimed subject matter. In re Self, 671 F.2d 1344, 1348,
213 USPQ 1, 5 (CCPA 1982).
As to the limitation of claim 5 requiring a second layer of a vulcanized
thermoplastic elastomer, the claimed subject matter states that it is directed to a floor
covering mat, “further including a reinforcing layer of thermoplastic material disposed
across the layer of vulcanized thermoplastic elastomer; and a second layer of vulcanized
thermoplastic elastomer disposed in sealing relation over the reinforcing layer of
thermoplastic material.” The claimed subject matter accordingly requires an additional
layer of thermoplastic material between the first and second vulcanized thermoplastic
elastomeric layers. The examiner argues that, “it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art to have used additional layers of the thermoplastic material,
motivated by the expectation that the additional layers would further enhance the
durability and strength of the material.” See Answer, page 8. We previously found
however that the purpose of the polypropylene copolymer film was to provide better
adhesion for the carpet material. This rationale would not apply to nor suggest its
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007