Ex Parte Iwasa et al - Page 3



          Appeal No. 2004-2257                                                        
          Application No. 09/841,486                                                  

               hydrophilic thermoplastic resin per 100 parts by weight of a           
               non-hydrophilic thermoplastic resin and 0 to 70% by weight             
               of at least one of an inorganic fine powder and an organic             
               fine powder in an intermeshing twin-screw extruder at a                
               screw shear rate of 300 sec-1 or higher and which has a                
               liquid absorbing capacity of 0.5 ml/m2 or more as measured             
               in accordance with the method specified in Japan TAPPI                 
               Standard No. 51-87                                                     
                                      PRIOR ART                                       
               The examiner relies on the following prior art references:             
          Suzuki et al. (Suzuki)        4,506,037           Mar. 19, 1985             
          Arai et al. (Arai)            4,686,118           Aug. 11, 1987             
          Fujita et al. (Fujita)        5,059,630           Oct. 22, 1991             
                                   THE REJECTIONS                                     
               The appealed claims stand rejected as follows:                         
          1)   Claims 1 through 6, 8, 9 and 13 through 19 under 35 U.S.C.             
               § 102(b) as anticipated by the disclosure of Suzuki2;                  
          2)   Claim 10 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as                      
               unpatentable over the combined disclosures of Suzuki and               
               Arai; and                                                              




               2 At page 3 of the Answer, the examiner has inadvertently              
          included canceled claim 7 in this rejection.  We have corrected             
          this inadvertent error made by the examiner by deleting canceled            
          claim 7 from the statement of rejection.                                    
                                          3                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007