Appeal No. 2005-0580
Application No. 09/732,871
absorbent structures respectively recited in claims 1 and 2. The
examiner cites Tunc as disclosing an absorbent article comprising
an absorbent structure arranged between a liquid pervious
topsheet and a liquid impervious backsheet, which arrangement is
conceded by the examiner to be lacking in Gravdahl. Although it
is not disputed that Tunc teaches that for which it is applied,
Tunc does not cure the above noted shortcomings of Gravdahl
relative to the absorbent structure limitations in claims 8 and
16.
Accordingly, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) rejection of claims 8 and 16 as being unpatentable over
Gravdahl in view of Tunc.
III. The 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 1, 6, and 9 as
being unpatentable over Gravdahl in view of Karami and
Hochstrasser
In this rejection, Karami and Hochstrasser are relied on by
the examiner to show absorbent structures having regions of
varying density formed by compressing multiple layers of material
(see Figures 5 through 5b of Karami and Figure 9 of
Hochstrasser). The examiner also relies on both the conventional
layered absorbent core shown in Gravdahl’s Figure 1 and the
inventive core 10 shown in Gravdahl’s Figure 2 as together
showing “a core of at least three strips of various size as
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007