CORREA et al. V. ROBERTS et al. - Page 34





               Interference No. 105,019                                                                                                
               Correa v. Roberts                                                                                                       
                      Although the barriers of Molee and Csillag have a different structure than that required by                      
               Correa's claim 11, they are there for the same purpose, i.e., to keep body liquids or exudates from                     
               leaking out of the absorbent article. Csillag's invention is directed to absorbent products used for                    
               absorbing and retaining body fluids and wom in contact with the body such as diapers, sanitary                          
               napkins, dressings and the like, and Molee's invention is directed to a sanitary napkin. The only                       
               teaching needed from either Molee or Csillag to combine with Correa's claim I is the recognition                        
               that body fluids or exudates can leak from the absorbent product in the longitudinal direction as                       
               well as in the lateral direction. Both Csillag and Molee clearly provide that teaching. Molee                           
               discloses use of transverse compressed channels 24 and 26 extending across the width of the                             
               absorbent article to control leakage in the longitudinal direction (Figure 5 and column 4, lines                        
               61-68), and Csillag discloses use of transverse narrow zones 30 impregnated with hydrophobic                            
               material to retard leakage in the longitudinal direction (Figure I and column 5, lines 19-22;                           
               Figures 6 and 8 and column 7, lines 11-20). That the structure of the barrier of Csillag and Molee                      
               is different from that required by Correa's claim I I is of no moment, the structure of the required                    
               barrier is already provided by Correa's claim I as prior art.                                                           
                      Correa's claim I I requires at least one end cuff. Correa's claim 12 requires two end cuffs.                     
               Correa's claim 13 requires that the end cuff of claim 11 extend across the width of the absorbent                       
               article. The transverse barrier zone of both Molee and Csillag are two in number and both extend                        
               across the width of the absorbent article (Molee Figure 1 and Csillag Figure 1). For reasons                            
               discussed above, the subject matter of these claims would have been obvious in view of the                              
               combination of Correa's claim I and either Molee or Csillag. The motivation to combine stems                            
                                                              - 34 -                                                                   







Page:  Previous  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007