Ex Parte GRAY et al - Page 2




              Appeal No. 2001-2629                                                                Page 2                
              Application No. 08/931,080                                                                                


                                                   BACKGROUND                                                           
                     The appellants’ invention relates to a two-part absorbent garment comprising a                     
              reusable outer brief and a disposable inner absorbent liner.  An understanding of the                     
              invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 1, which appears in the                        
              appendix to the Substitute Brief.                                                                         
                     The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the                    
              appealed claims are:                                                                                      
              Enloe et al. (Enloe)                      4,846,825                   Jul. 11, 1989                       
              Stevens et al. (Stevens)                  4,892,598                   Jan.  9, 1990                       
              Cooper                                    5,087,253                   Feb. 11,1992                        
              Gagnon                                    5,217,447                   Jun.   8, 1993                      
              German Offenlegungsschrift         DE 26 48 932                       May   3, 19781                      
                     (Reindl)                                                                                           
              French Patent Application                 2,606,257                   May 13, 19881                       
                     (Pigneul)                                                                                          
              PCT Application (Schmitz)          WO 95/02382                        Jan. 26, 1995                       



                     As stated by the examiner on pages 5 and 6 of the Answer, the standing                             
              rejections are:2                                                                                          

                     1Our understanding of this foreign language reference was obtained through a PTO translation, a    
              copy of which is enclosed.                                                                                
                     2Rejections of claims 11, 16, 18 and 19 as being anticipated by Schmitz under 35 U.S.C.            
              § 102(b), of claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 19 as being unpatentable over Schmitz under 35 U.S.C. 
                                                                                            (continued...)              







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007