Appeal No. 2005-0146
Application No. 10/274,635
1023, 1027 (Fed. Cir. 1997); see also In re Graves, 69 F.3d 1147,
1152, 36 USPQ2d 1697, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 1995).
The term “covered on both sides” is not specifically defined
in the specification. Appellants do disclose that the gypsum core
is “sandwiched” between the first and second nonwoven sheets (page
4, ll. 14-15). The specification does not exclude pore sizes of
the pervious fabric which are large enough that the gypsum slurry
fills the pores or even goes through the pores to contact the
fabric liner. To the contrary, appellants’ specification teaches
that the first surface of the first and second nonwoven sheets may
be coated with a primer layer of gypsum slurry (page 4, ll. 35-37).
The specification also teaches that the nonwoven sheets have open
pores between fibers of sufficient size for the gypsum slurry to
enter the pores (page 5, ll. 32-36). The specification teaches an
embodiment where the range of pore sizes of the nonwoven sheets
allows the wet, set gypsum layer to intertwine with the fibers of
the synthetic fibrous liner without the gypsum slurry penetrating
completely through the nonwoven liner (page 12, ll. 10-12).
However, we find no evidence from the specification that this
limitation should be imported into the claims. See In re Prater,
415 F.2d 1393, 1405, 162 USPQ 541, 551 (CCPA 1969); and In re
Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 322, 13 USPQ2d 1320, 1322 (Fed. Cir. 1989).
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007