Ex Parte Mitchler et al - Page 4



          Appeal No. 2005-1207                                                        
          Application No. 10/126,342                                 Page 4           

               Concerning this matter, Brooker teaches that the meltblown             
          fibers employed are tacky subsequent to extrusion through a die             
          and prior to consolidation.  While the fibers are in a tacky                
          state, Brooker teaches that the particles are incorporated in the           
          meltblown fiber stream in a manner such that the particles adhere           
          to the surfaces of the tacky fibers thereby avoiding subsequent             
          dusting problems with the product during use.  See the abstract,            
          column 2, lines 20-44 and column 3, lines 4-19 of Brooker.                  
          Dusting is the same or similar problem allegedly addressed by               
          appellants’ claimed invention.  See page 2, lines 15-17 of                  
          appellants’ specification.  Moreover, Brooker teaches that the              
          particles employed can be fed via a feed hopper using an air                
          stream to convey the particles or powder into the stream of                 
          meltblown fibers so as to hold the particles to the fibers within           
          the formed web by more than physical entrapment of particles                
          among the fibers.  See column 6, lines 3 through 53 of Brooker.             
               Given that disclosure of Brooker, we agree with the examiner           
          that it is reasonable to conclude that the particles of Brooker             
          would at least slightly penetrate (pass into or through, or                 
          reach) the tacky surface (outer face or boundary) of the                    

          required by representative claim 13.  Thus, we need not address             
          McFarland with regard to representative claim 10.                           





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007