Ex Parte Bansal et al - Page 2



          Appeal No. 2006-0904                                                        
          Application No. 09/919,465                                                  

               copolymers of ethylene and methacrylic acid, and random                
               copolymers of ethylene and vinyl acetate, and                          
                    a second polymer component is a single polymer selected           
               from the group consisting of polyolefin and polyester.                 
               The examiner relies upon the following references as                   
          evidence of obviousness:                                                    
          Shawyer et al. (Shawyer)     5,405,682              Apr. 11, 1995           
          Newkirk et al. (Newkirk)     6,417,121              Jul.  9, 2002           
               Appellants’ claimed invention is directed to a multiple                
          component meltblown web comprising multiple component meltblown             
          fibers.  The multiple component meltblown fibers consist of first           
          and second non-elastomeric polymers.  A first polymer component             
          is a blend of the recited first and second non-elastomeric                  
          polymers whereas the second polymer component is either a                   
          polyolefin or a polyester.                                                  
               All the appealed claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                 
          § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shawyer in view of Newkirk.             
               Appellants have not set forth an argument that is reasonably           
          specific to any particular claim on appeal.  Accordingly, all the           
          appealed claims stand or fall together with claim 1.                        
               We have thoroughly reviewed each of appellants’ arguments              
          for patentability.  However, we are in complete agreement with              
          the examiner that the claimed subject matter would have been                

                                          2                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007