Appeal No. 2005-1611
Application No. 09/808,812
As with Gasper, Payne has no disclosure that the two layers of
his composite have different properties or are made from
different materials. Thus, the pivotal issue raised by these
Section 103 rejections, like the issue raised by the above
discussed Section 102 rejection, is whether the examiner has
properly interpreted appealed claim 1 as broadly encompassing an
embodiment wherein the dimensionally stable geotextile and the
pliable geotextile are both made from the same material and
possess the same properties.
For the reasons previously detailed, this claim
interpretation is not reasonable and consistent with the
appellants’ specification. It follows that we also cannot
sustain the Section 103 rejections of claims 1-8 based on the
Payne and Adam references and of claim 9 based on these
references and further in view of Lou.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007