Appeal No. 2005-2481
Application No. 10/075,096
This appealed subject matter is adequately represented by independent
claims 1 and 49 which read as follows:
1. A root growth barrier, comprising a layer of a
root-tip-trapping material bonded to a layer of a
root-impenetrable material.
49. A root growth barrier, comprising:
a polymer sheet having a surface bonded to a porous
fabric.
The references set forth below are relied upon by the examiner in
the § 102 and § 103 rejections before us.
Thomas 5,311,700 May 17, 1994
Flasch, Jr. (Flasch) 5,852,896 Dec. 29, 1998
Kalpin 3,094,810 Jun. 25, 1963
Reiger 6,202,348 Mar. 20, 2001
(Filed Jun. 22, 1998)
Billings 6,223,466 May 01, 2001
(Filed Oct. 08, 1999)
Berlit et al. (Berlit). GB 2,073,576 Oct. 21, 1981
Van der Goorbergh EP 300578 Jan. 25, 1989
Claims 1, 2, 4, 13-16, 18, 19, 29, 30, 41, 46, 48, 49, 53 and 63
are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Berlit.
Under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), the remaining claims on appeal are
rejected as being unpatentable over Berlit alone or in various
combinations with the other applied references listed above.
We refer to the brief and reply brief and to the answer (as well
as the final action mailed January 14, 2004 which is alluded to on
page 3 of the answer) for a complete exposition of the opposing
viewpoints expressed by the appellant and by the examiner concerning
the above noted rejections.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007