Ex Parte Bruce et al - Page 2



          Appeal No. 2005-0146                                                        
          Application No. 10/274,635                                                  

          gypsum-core construction material, the gypsum core is covered on            
          both sides with synthetic polymeric fibrous sheets comprising at            
          least 50 wt.% of fibers selected from the group consisting of               
          polyester, nylon, polyurethane, and co-polyether-ester (id.).               
               Appellants state that claims 21, 25, 26 and 28 stand or fall           
          together while all other claims may be considered separately                
          (Brief, page 2).  To the extent appellants present arguments to             
          individual claims, these claims are considered separately.  See             
          37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7)(2003); In re McDaniel, 293 F.3d 1379, 1383,            
          63 USPQ2d 1462, 1465 (Fed. Cir. 2002).  Representative independent          
          claim 28 is reproduced below:                                               
               28.  A gypsum-core construction material resistant to fungal           
          growth, wherein the gypsum core is covered on both sides with               
          synthetic polymeric fibrous sheets comprising at least 50 wt.% of           
          fibers selected from the group consisting of polyester, nylon,              
          polyurethane and co-polyether-ester.                                        
               The examiner relies upon the following references as evidence          
          of unpatentability:                                                         
          Long                        4,094,694          June 13, 1978                
          Miller                      5,350,554          Sep. 27, 1994                
          Englert                     5,817,262          Oct. 06, 1998                
               Claims 21, 25 and 28 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)           
          as anticipated by Miller (Answer, page 3).  Claims 22-24 and 29-31          
          stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Miller         
                                          2                                           




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

Last modified: November 3, 2007