Appeal No. 2001-1712
Application No. 09/456,968
Turning to the rejections based on prior art, Nichols
describes a washable mop 10 including a mop handle 12, a mop
head 20, a mop pad 28, and a storage device 40. (Column 2, line
64 to column 3, line 5; column 4, lines 9-11; Fig. 1.)
According to Nichols (column 4, lines 36-53; Fig. 3), the mop
pad includes a base member 30, a filler material (e.g.,
fiberfill batting) 32 for absorbing liquids, a fabric covering
34, a netting 36 for improving scrubbing action, and a
securement device 38.
Thus, in contrast to the invention recited in appealed
claim 30, Nichols’s mop does not include an absorbent layer
comprising a “superabsorbent material.” (Answer, page 4.) In
an attempt to account for this difference, the examiner relies
on the teachings of Newell.
In contrast to Nichols, Newell describes a mop head
comprising a plurality of web elements having involutions, which
may be formed by subjecting web elements to an involution-
forming treatment such as (a) successive tensioning and
detensioning conditions, (b) compression conditions, (c)
differential stressing conditions, (d) twisting conditions, and
(e) combinations of such conditions. (Column 3, lines 39-48;
Figs. 1-11.) Newell does teach that “in a single-use mop
application, the web elements may be impregnated or otherwise
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007