Appeal No. 2002-0983
Application No. 09/399,890
blocks the flow of air and liquid water but allows the
transmission of water vapor and is especially useful as a
building wrap or roof underlayment. (Specification, page 1,
lines 7-11 and page 5, lines 11-14.) Further details of this
appealed subject matter are recited in representative claim 1,
the only independent claim on appeal, reproduced below:
1. A laminate composite material comprising:
a) a layer of an open weave supporting fabric;
b) a layer of breathable resin film, said resin
film layer being substantially impervious to air and
water and permeable to water vapor; and
c) a layer of a thermoplastic resin blended
with a high temperature volatile particulate extruded
between said layer of fabric and said layer of
breathable resin film wherein the laminate composite
material has a water vapor transmission rate exceeding
1 perm of water vapor.
The examiner relies on the following prior art references
as evidence of unpatentability:
Topolkaraev et al. 6,117,438 Sep. 12, 2000
(Topolkaraev) (filed Dec. 31, 1997)
Doyle et al. 6,133,168 Oct. 17, 2000
(Doyle) (filed Oct. 20, 1998)
Claims 1 through 8 on appeal stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Doyle in view of Topolkaraev.
(Examiner’s answer of Dec. 18, 2001, paper 9, pages 3-4.)
We reverse.
“Where claimed subject matter has been rejected as obvious
in view of a combination of prior art references, a proper
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007