Appeal No. 2002-0502
Application 08/853,425
OPINION
We reverse the aforementioned rejections. We need to
address only claim 8, which is the broadest claim to an absorbent
barrier sheet.2
Rejection over Heiman in view of Osborn
Heiman discloses an absorbent barrier sheet comprising an
integral fabric having a hydrophobic upper portion which tends
toward dry, a lower fluid-retaining portion in wicking
communication with the upper portion, and a barrier sheet, which
tends to be dry, below the lower fluid-retaining portion (col. 7,
lines 21-27; col. 9, line 63 - col. 10, line 18; col. 11,
lines 27-45; col. 13, line 59 - col. 14, line 4). The appellant
acknowledges that the appellant’s integral fabric web is the same
as that of Heiman (specification, page 6, lines 3-9; brief,
page 6). Heiman’s absorbent barrier sheet differs from that of
the appellant in that Heiman’s barrier sheet is not intimately
connected to substantially the entire lower surface of the fabric
web lower portion. Instead, Heiman’s integral fabric web and
barrier sheet are held together by overcast stitching or the
2 Claim 18, which is the broadest claim to a method for
forming an absorbent barrier sheet, is of comparable scope to
claim 8.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007