Interference No. 105,019
Correa v. Roberts
Correa's Fact I 46(b) do not satisfy the requirement of a pair of barrier elements comprising a
layer of absorbent material overlying said topsheet and joined thereto along said longitudinal
edges. As is pointed out by Correa, Lawson '278 describes barrier cuffs 62, one on either side,
separately secured to the topsheet 38 along longitudinal edges and which may be provided with
absorbent means therein. Column 10, lines 34-36; column 9, lines 47-49; column 4,19-22;
column 4, lines 5-8; Figures 3 and 4. Roberts' argument is not that barrier cuffs 62 of Lawson
'278 are not barrier elements comprising a layer of absorbent material overlying the top sheet and
joined thereto along longitudinal edges, but that the overall article disclosed by Lawson '278 is a
diaper while the claimed article of Roberts is a sanitary napkin. According to Roberts (Opp. at
15), the recitation of "sanitary napkin" in Roberts' claim 20 takes on structural significance which
cannot be ignored in conducting an anticipation analysis. The argument is rejected.
The preamble of claim 20 of Roberts recites: "A sanitary napkin comprising:"; Roberts'
specification does not provide any special definition for the term "sanitary napkin." Thus, we
regard the ten-n as having its ordinary meaning in the English language. In The Random House
College Dictionary, Revised Edition (1982), the term "sanitary napkin" is defined as:
an absorbent pad for wear by women during menstruation to
absorb the uterine flow.
The only structure required by a "sanitary napkin" is an absorbent pad. The rest of the definition
is directed to an intended use for the pad, i.e., worn by women during menstruation to absorb the
uterine flow. All of the structural significance of a "sanitary napkin" is already met by the
disclosure in Lawson '278 of an absorbent core having a body-facing surface, a garment-facing
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007