Interference No. 105,019
Correa v. Roberts
surface, and longitudinal edges. The barrier cuffs 62 of Lawson '278 do not cease to be barrier
elements simply because the overall article is a "diaper" not necessarily worn by women during
menstruation to absorb uterine flow. Note further that the "diaper" disclosed in Lawson '278 is
not strictly for infants. The Lawson '278 reference defines the term "diaper" as follows (column
3, lines 4-6):
As used herein, the term "diaper" refers to a garment generally worn by infants
and incontinent persons that is worn about the lower torso of the wearer.
(Emphasis added.)
We find that Lawson '278 discloses diapers of sufficient size to fit an adult female as well as
diapers for infants, both having the structure described in its disclosure and shown in its Figures.
According to Correa's preliminary motion Fact T 47, citing to various parts of the Lawson
'278 reference, Lawson '278 discloses that when the "sanitary napkin" assumes a shape when
wom, the barrier elements stand up to form channels for containing body fluids. Roberts does not
dispute these alleged facts. Based on Correa's Fact T 47 and parts of Lawson '278 cited in that
paragraph, we find that Lawson '278 discloses that when its disclosed article assumes a shape
when worn, the barrier elements stand up to form channels for containing body fluid.
The only item not accounted for, then, is the "sanitary napkin" recited in the preamble of
Roberts' claim 20. As is noted above, a "sanitary napkin" is merely an absorbent pad for wear by
women during menstruation to absorb the uterine flow, and the requirement for an absorbent pad
is already accounted for by the disclosure of the Lawson '278 reference. We hold that the term
adds nothing of structural significance to the features recited in the body of the claim. Rather, it
adds only a statement of the intended use for the claimed article.
- 10 -
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007