Appeal No. 2005-1487
Application No. 10/383,781
10 “stand together as a group” (Brief, page 4). Accordingly, we
select claim 9 from this grouping and decide the ground of
rejection in this appeal on the basis of this claim alone. See
37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7)(2003). Representative independent claim
9 is reproduced below:
9. A dyed fabric blend comprising:
20-80% aramid fibers
80-20% flame retardant cellulosic fibers and said
fibers being dyed to a single shade of color and said dye
penetrating into said fibers and said fabric having an
abrasion resistance (ASTM D-3884) of 250 cycles or better.
The examiner has relied on Lunsford et al. (Lunsford), U.S.
Patent No. 6,132,476, issued Oct. 17, 2000, as the sole evidence
of unpatentability. Claims 9 and 10 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Lunsford (Answer, page 3).
We affirm the examiner’s rejection essentially for the
reasons stated in the Answer, as well as those reasons set forth
below.
OPINION
The examiner finds that Lunsford discloses fabric blends of
inherently flame resistant fibers and flame resistant cellulosic
fibers, teaching that these dyed fabrics exhibit excellent flame
resistance, minimal shrinkage when laundered, and exemplifying
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007